• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Outraging public decency.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

OUTRAGING PUBLIC DECENCY As a common law misdemeanour, the offence of outraging public decency is triable only on indictment and is punishable with imprisonment fixed for a period at the discretion of the judge. The act must be done in a place where at least two members of the public might see it. It is evident that Jane Horroll urinated in front of over 80 people at the theatre, this would mean that she has committed an act outraging public decency and it is irrelevant that the members of the audience were not outraged by this action. In Lunderbech [1991] the defendant masturbated in a children's playground and was seen by only two police officers who did not testify that they were outraged, the court said that ...read more.

Middle

In Knuller v DPP (1973) the majority of the House of Lords held orbiter, that outraging public decency was a common law offence, examples of which are indecent exposure, acts of sexual indecency in public and mounting an indecent exhibition as the courts decided in Cruden (1809), Gibson (1990) and Mayling (1963). A modern case in which the existence of the offence had previously been recognised by the Court of Criminal Appeal in is Mayling (1963). Any doubt as to the existence of the offence was removed by the decision of the Court of Appeal in 1991 in Gibsons (1990) where the court agreed with the majority of the House of Lords in Knuller. ...read more.

Conclusion

It is not necessary for the prosecution also to prove that the accused had an intention to outrage public decency or that he was subjectly reckless (or indeed, that ha had any mens rea) as to the risk of such an outrage occurring. In other words the offence of outraging public decency is one of strict liability, as was followed in Gibson (1990). With all the facts of this case and the legal principles that have been used for this argument, it is evident that Jane Horroll did in fact commit an act outraging public decency even though the audience did not find this offensive. I would therefore wish that the House of Lords refuse this appeal on the grounds stated. This concludes my submission, My Lord. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Law essays

  1. What is an indictable offence and how is it brought to trial?

    There are three main ways in which this is evident. First, there is now an external body (or bodies, perhaps) competent to make laws affecting the United Kingdom, which are applied by the English courts irrespective of the wishes of Parliament.

  2. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    Protection to the Collecting Banker A collecting banker is one who receives the payment of a crossed check on behalf of his customer. Section 131 grants protection to the collecting banker and states that "a banker who has in good faith and without negligence received payment for a customer of

  1. Explain the need for discipline in at least two public services. Analyse the role ...

    Mr Antonio Taguba carried out an investigation on the events in Abu Ghraib and wrote a report on these this was known as the Taguba report and it revealed horrendous events such as the following: ? Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet.

  2. Using actual situations describe the elements of actus

    there is an honest belief based on reasonable grounds that force is necessary. Forcible resistance may not be carried to the point of taking life when it is otherwise possible to retreat safely from the assailant. If more force than is necessary is used to repel the attack, the person will be liable both civilly and criminally for assault.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work