Sexual Assault - developments in Wales (1 Viewer)

[Demandred]

Hey Frigid, is that a ground breaking case? Those two paragraphs seems to be the application of Brown and Kitchener .

 

[Frigid]

nah probably not ground-breaking... just fun to watch the law "as it is made"... hehehe... it must be remembered that Kitchener (i've never read Brown) only went as far up as the NSWCCA.

thus, this case is authoritative stuff, coming from the High Court. although, i wonder why there's only four justices in this case...

 

[Demandred]

I think there's more to it, it is pretty rare for the HCA to accept criminal cases, especially when Brown and Kitchener fits that shoe perfectly (according to those two paragraphs).

Anyone liked Kirby's judgement in Kitchener ?:

"OMFGZ0rs! complete inadvertence is not recklessness and does not consititute mens rea?! get the hell out of my of house of law!"

 

[prosaic]

And Brown was an English case after the Australia Act 1985/6 no? Hence only now is this law in Aus, no?

 

[Demandred]

I am abit surprised that the HCA had to fully carve Brown in stone.

 

[prosaic]

I am abit surprised that the HCA had to fully carve Brown in stone.

I've only briefly skimmed the Banditt judgment, and by that I mean I skimmed topic sentences, but I'd been inclined to infer that the clarification of Brown was necessary due to the Lord Mustill's very strong dissent in it.

The dissent raised a lot of controversy in English law and was probably, at least in academic and judicial circles, very unsettled in Australia as well.

From memory I think it was mainly humanitarian/queer groups protesting in England with relation to judges' generally conservatively negative views on homosexual masochistic activities because a subsequent case in which a husband carved his name in his wife's butt cheeks was charged with same convictions as in Brown when she suffered "grievous injuries", but not convicted. I guess there were also other important matters of contention too.