Applying The Actus Reus Of Assault By Concentration

1532 Words4 Pages

Vince re Tina Since there has been penetration, but not by Vince’s penis, the offences that Vince could be liable for would be sexual assault, assault by penetration and sexual activity with a child. Assault by penetration (s.2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003) The actus reus of assault by penetration is the penetration, by the defendant, of the vagina or anus got another person with a part of the defendant's body or anything else. The penetration must be sexual and the victim does not consent to the penetration. The mens rea of assault by penetration is the intention two commit an act of penetration where the defendants does not have the reasonable belief of the consent of the victim. Applying the actus reus to the facts: Vince has …show more content…

Therefore he does not have the required mens rea for the offence. Both the actus reus and the mens rea are appear to be incomplete in this situation and it is unlikely that's Vince is guilty of this offends Sexual assault (s. 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003) The actus reus of sexual assault is the sexual touching of another person who does not consent to that touching. Section 78 outlines that touching is what a reasonable person would consider the conduct to be ‘sexual’. Where ambiguity exists, a jury can consider whether the circumstances surrounding the conduct including the defendant’s purpose amounts to a sexual nature. The mens rea of a sexual assault is that the touching of the victim must be intentional where there is a lack of reasonable belief that the victim is consenting. Applying the actus reus to the facts: Vince has touched another person by kissing Tina and also stroking Tina’s breasts. This touching would be considered sexual and is in no way ambiguous. However, Tina has consented to this contact and therefore the actus reus of sexual assault has not been …show more content…

To avoid conviction Will would look to provide evidence to show that he believed that Una had consented, was fully aware of the act and was not being detained at the time. His belief will not be enough on its own, there must be clear consent. Will would indicate that the noises Una had made during sexual intercourse showed she was consensual and aware, and that Vince had locked the door without his knowledge. The prosecution would have to prove that there was a lack of reasonable belief in consent, and would probably do so by establishing that Una did not have the capacity to consent. This will be determined by evaluating all the circumstances of the

More about Applying The Actus Reus Of Assault By Concentration

Open Document