IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) by Auzudc2

VIEWS: 72 PAGES: 1

									IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
BETWEEN:

                                         DAVE                            APPELANT

                                         - and -

                                           R                             RESPONDANT

                        SKELETON ARGUMENT - APPELANTS

Grounds of Appeal:

   1) It is submitted that the trial judges directions to the jury regarding the capacity
      to consent were incorrect due to the fact that they closely resembled the
      terminology used for involuntary intoxication and were therefore unduly
      restrictive. Voluntary intoxication is not a defence on behalf of the defendant
      in crimes of basic intent as stated in DPP v Majewski, and therefore can be
      argued that where it is voluntary the claimant should also be responsible for
      their own actions. This as proposed by the 1998 Draft Offences Against the
      Person Bill s.19. In addition the appellants case can be supported from
      inferences made by the decision in R v Bree (Benjamin). The judge should
      have followed the example set in the case of R v Olugboja (Stephen).


   2) It is submitted that the trial judge erred in directing the jury that Dave’s prior
      experiences with Valerie were irrelevant because under s.1 (c) of the Sexual
      Offences Act 2003, the defendant has committed rape if ‘he does not
      reasonably believe that B consents’. In determining whether a defendant
      reasonably believes in consent under s.1 (2) of the Act, the jury must consider
      all circumstances. By instructing the information regarding Dave’s prior
      experiences meant the jury did not consider all circumstances as required by
      the Act, originally proposed in the Government White Paper Protecting the
      People.


   3) It is submitted that the appeal should be allowed


Authorities

DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443
Sexual Offences Act 2003
Government White Paper ‘Protecting the People’
1998 Draft Offences Against the Person Bill
R v Bree (Benjamin) [2007] EWCA Crim 804, [2008] QB 131
R v Olugboja (Stephen) [1982] Q.B. 320 CA (Crim Div)




Lead Counsel: Miss Lewis                                     Junior Counsel: Mr Yeung

								
To top