Consent In Criminal Law Essay

In this case due to the very general nature of the battered woman syndrome given from the expert and Heather there was no error in the directions given to the jury. 3. Significance This particular case is quite significant as it raised a fair bit of awareness about domestic violence and violence against women. The use of ‘the battered woman syndrome’ as a defense linked to self-defense, and the publicity surrounding the case meant that the general Australian public was exposed to the issue. As a result of the case, a feminist activist group called “The Release Heather Osland Group” fought for the emancipation of Heather, any other women in a similar situation to her and a change in legislation making ‘the battered woman syndrome’ an legal defense.

Even when Michael’s new defense team, through the innocence project, found a crime that was eerily similar to the method of murder and subsequent events to the one that Michael was convicted of, the new prosecutor in Williamson County fought hard to keep DNA testing from taking place, even stating that they objected to the testing now because the defense hadn’t requested it before (Morton, 2014). There was further evidence of ineffectiveness in that the coroner who’d changed his estimated time of death between the autopsy and trial, had come under scrutiny for his findings in this case, as well as several others, with claims of gross errors “including one case where he came to the conclusion that a man who’d been stabbed in the back had committed suicide” (Morton, 2014). This was only one of the many injustices that were committed against Michael Morton throughout his trial. In August of 2006, the defense was finally granted permission to perform DNA testing on the items that had been taken from his wife’s body (Morton, 2014). Although this testing did not reveal any information about the guilty party, it did at least give Michael the knowledge that Chris was not sexually violated before or after her death (Morton,

As with the previous trial, the “intent of purpose” comes into effect here. Each person had a slightly different role in acquiring their case, but it still falls under the same offense. They were both charged with sexual assault of a minor, and received due punishment. In conclusion, my experience of

Rusk appealed the decision saying to be convicted of rape, he would have had to have used force or or without the consent of the victim which he said none of those things happened. The appellate court found not enough evidence to prove Pat was a victim of rape and overturned the conviction. The prosecutor then appealed that decision by the court and was sent to the Maryland Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that threats of force need not be made in an particular manner in order to put a person in fear of bodily harm (Brody and Acker, 2010). One of the judges even emphasized the absence of “force, or violence, or anything that would lead you to believe that this act was done against somebody’s will or consent (Suk, 2012).

Emma Hodges Topic 2A Defense of Mr. Smith While Mr. Smith is accused of assault, we can see that this is not true when we examine the precedent set in State v. Black. To examine both cases it is important to first know the circumstances of each. In State v. Black, the wife started a fight in which the husband, after much provocation, dragged her to the floor by her hair. In Mr. Smith’s case, his wife initiated an argument, within earshot of the couple’s eight-year-old child and a neighbor’s child, over the family’s finances and her husband’s drinking. Mr. Smith, overwhelmed by his wife’s screaming, threatened to hit her unless she stopped.

#1). Why did the court in the Hargrave case (Text p. 173) find that Karen Hargrave was not, in fact, married to the decedent, Duval? Common-law marriages were statutorily abrogated in South Dakota in 1959 by an amendment to the SDCL 25-1-29. The ammended statute provided that any marriage contracted outside the jurisdiction of this state which is valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which such marriage was contracted, is valid in this state.

As with any criminal case, there are always a number of issues pertaining the stages of the crime and also the media and the general public’s opinion of the case. Many of the issues and explicit actions of certain individuals that had happened during the Corryn Rayney case had affected the interpretation of the case in someway for both government workers and the general public. By analysing the issues of the case, it allows a much more detailed view on the case and how most of the issues are linked in one way or another. One of the issues regarding this case was where a police officer had been found attempting to pressure forensic pathologists to alter their case reports to align with their best interests.

The other victim’s consent could not be given because of her intoxication. Perpetrator(s) The perpetrators in the first case were high school athletes. The perpetrators supposedly knew the victim from childhood and knew about her disability. The disability is the reason that they targeted her

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are here because one person in this courtroom decided to take law into her own hands. The defendant, Mrs. Dominique Stephens, murdered the man that she vowed to love. This sole act by the defendant is violation of all morals and her husband’s right to live. Afterwards, she even felt guilty about this violation of justice and called the cops on herself, and she later signed a written statement stating that she is guilty of the murder of Mr. Donovan Stephens. Then the defendant later recanted this statement and said that she only killed Mr. Stephens in self defense.

The discretion of the case was significant in the regard of the defense, which countered some contradicted evidences. The evidences from the trial and the hearing preliminaries have revealed that the children were coached. The testimony showed lack of credibility on the issues and showing the significance of the discretion on the defense. McMartin told his attorney that he did not do it and his attorney used his discretion and believed him.

There were claims on the Manton case study that Dixon had prior history of engaging in sexual activity at his high school, which led Dixon to be suspended twice for the prior sexual acts. At the time of this incident, Dixon was 18 years old, and the “victim” was 15 (Manton, 2005). Following this factual information, Dixon at that time claimed that the sexual act was consensual and accused the girl of fabricating the story because of fear of her parents finding out and punishing her for sleeping with a black man (Manton, 2005). Several charges were suggested for Dixon which included: statutory rape, aggravated child molestation, rape, sexual battery, false imprisonment, and aggravated assist (Manton, 2005). Dixon was then acquitted of a majority of the charges and found Dixon guilty of statutory rape and aggravated child molestation (Manton,

Ohio reached a decision on June 19th 1961, the Supreme Courts vote was split 5-3 in favor of Mapp. The issue in this case was using evidence obtained illegally, not having a search warrant, and using it in court cases. The police invaded Mapp’s house on the belief of her harboring a bombing suspect, but had found obscene pictures, which were obtained illegally. Now police need to get a search warrant in order to go through suspect’s homes and gather evidence, so they are not in violation of the law. This case was compelling to me, because in ways it can protect a criminal; however, it does protect the rights of

Both of the case involves Religion. Based on the R v. Tutton case, even though the accused was following their religion, it does not help the fact that in the end they still committed murder. In this case, although the father was following his own religion, it still does not help the fact that he still physically beaten the child with a

Another fact that can be brought up is that some minors are more mature than others. So why doesn 't this change the statutory rape laws. To make sure every court has an equal understanding otherwise it would only favor those on each case. To base Statutory laws on situational factors is really unfair. Laws can not be changed on each case basis.

The appellant had intercourse with the complainant. The issue raised in this case is did the complainant consent to the sexual intercourse. The appellant did not consider whether she consented and proceeded with it anyway. In the judgment of R v Tolmie , when Kirby P was defining inadvertent recklessness, he referred to the statements in DPP v Morgan and