Outraging public decency.
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  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 "where the act is plainly indecent and likely to disgust and annoy, the jury are entitled to infer such disgust and annoyance without affirmative evidence that anyone was disgusted or annoyed". Therefore, the learned trial judge did not, as a matter of law misdirect the jury in Jane Horroll's case. In May (1989) the courts held that it was irrelevant that the boys may have enjoyed the performance of the schoolmaster 'behaving in an indecent manner with a desk' in the presence of the two boys. The effect seems to be that the offence is committed if the jury think the conduct outrageously indecent because it would disgust and annoy them and therefore the ordinary
For this essay we will be looking at the defence of assault and battery, consent. But first we have to discuss what is assault and battery.
In most crimes there are always defences to the offence that has been committed, for example, if one is charged with murder, then a defence of either provocation or diminished responsibility can be raised. There are other defences such as mistake or intoxication. In this case one will discuss when the defence of consent can be used against a criminal charge. For this essay we will be looking at the defence of assault and battery, consent. But first we have to discuss what is assault and battery. Assault and battery are separate crimes, under S.39 of the Criminal Justice act 1988. This was confirmed in the case of DPP vs. Little 1992. In legal terms an assault means to cause V to apprehend force, for example, waving a fist at someone's face is deemed an assault, while battery means to apply force to V; for example, punching someone in the face is a battery. Usually the two crimes are committed close together. So for instance, drawing your fist back is an assault, and then throwing the punch and connecting is a battery. Hence assault and battery. In the case of R vs. Clarence 1888 P consented to intercourse with D, despite D knowing that he was suffering from a venereal disease, which P did not know about. D was convicted of assaulting her, but his appeal was allowed. It was held that because P consented to intercourse with D there was no assault. However, consent is
"Equity gave new rights and new remedies"
"Equity gave new rights and new remedies". Explain and illustrate this statement as fully as possible, showing how equitable remedies contributed to the development of new interests in land. The common law has been romantically and mistakenly described as the law of the common people of England. In fact, it could be argued that the common law was a product of a particular struggle for political power. Before the Norman Conquest of England in 1066, a unitary, national legal system did not actually exist. The common law was developed after the Norman Conquest through the "itinerant justices" travelling around the country in order to sort out disputes by selecting the best local customs and making them the basis of the law of England. Civil actions in these courts had to be started by a writ, which set out the cause of the action or the grounds for the claim made, and there grew up different types of writ. Litigants had to fit their circumstances to one of the available types of writ: if the case did not fall within one of those types, there was no way of bringing the case to the common law court. At the same time, the common law was itself becoming increasingly rigid and offered only one remedy; damages, which was not always an adequate solution to every problem; for example, the plaintiff may have contracted to purchase a particular plot of land from the defendant for which
Should juvenile offenders be treated differently to adult offenders?
The Criminal Process and Sentencing/Punishment Should juvenile offenders be treated differently to adult offenders? Juvenile offender's also known as young offenders are classified in an individual section of the criminal justice system Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW). This is known as the Juvenile Justice System which describes how juveniles are treated in the criminal justice system. It incorporates legislation, policing, the courts and aspects of welfare including criminology, crime prevention strategies, punishment and rehabilitation. Juvenile Justice Law is not Commonwealth Law however; it is State Law with each state in Australia having their own laws. New South Wales is the largest juvenile justice jurisdiction in Australia, once you turn 10 years you can be charged with a criminal offence. However, juvenile justice is part of International Law and it is seen that juveniles should be treated differently from adults in the criminal justice system. This is as; there are different ways in which you deal with children opposed to adults. This includes separate courts and prisons for each. Both children and adults are subjected to the same Criminal Law, however, if a criminal offence is committed children are differently treated. There are specific rules about the criminal proceedings which include: no child under the age of 10 can be charged with a
Critically evaluate the changes which have been made since 1990 to the definition of the offence of rape
Critically evaluate the changes which have been made since 1990 to the definition of the offence of rape Much of the law dates from a hundred years ago and more, when society was very different and sexual offences demonstrate the complexity of the law, which is made increasingly difficult by changes and amendments over time. Far more now is known about the patterns of sexual abuse and the law needs to reflect today's knowledge. The changing definition of rape illustrates clearly how 'we must have laws that are fit for the twenty-first century reflecting today's society and attitudes and provide effective protection for individuals against today's crimes.'1 These changes have largely developed since 1990 with the introduction of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which built on the Sexual Offences Act 1956 which simply provided that 'it was an offence for a man to rape a woman.' The structure of sexual offences in English criminal law places rape at the top of the criminal hierarchy carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.2 The criminal law has remained far from static and this essay is concerned with the evolution of the definition of rape particularly since 1990 and how and why these changes were brought about. Rape is only committed where the man has sexual intercourse without the complainant's consent. Intercourse is defined as the penetration of the
Should Capital Punishment be enforced
Joyce Au Meredith Morris Law & Society: Contemporary Debates 6 July 2009 Capital Punishment: Should capital punishment be enforced? Capital Punishment is defined by the Oxford English dictionary as the "legally authorized killing of someone as a punishment for a crime". Today, it has become a globally prevalent and intense topic of debate in the Criminal Justice System with numerous organizations and individuals' participation. Many deliberations have occurred, including the questionings of whether such acts are humane, and would often incorporate religious, emotional and economical concerns. Currently, the United States is one of the very few countries which continue to practice capital punishment, the main part being the southern states. This essay will be touching on the history of capital punishment, as well as the debate as to whether capital punishment should be enforced. It has been said that capital punishment in America was heavily influenced by Britain. The first established capital punishment laws dated back as far as the eighteenth century B.C.E., in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which coded 25 crimes punishable by death. The first known execution in America that was recorded dated back to 1608 when Captain George Kendall in the Jamestown colony of Virginia was executed for being a spy for Spain. In 1612, Virginia Governor Sir Thomas Dale increased
Legally Blonde By Amanda Brown )Summary Elle Woods is first a student at the University of Southern California with her boyfriend Warner Hunington. One day, Warner invite her for dinner, because he wants to announce something. Elle hopes that he propos to her (Antrag stellen). But Warner tells her, that he will go to Sanford Law School and therefore he has to leave her because he wants a more serious girlfriend, who is good enough for his own high standards. First Elle is very down but then she thinks that she can also go to Law School, show Warner that she is serious enough and recapture him. After exams she can go to Stanford. She doesn't like Law School. It's difficult to recapture Warner because he has a fiancée named Sarah. Everybody thinks that she gives up though she stays there. A boy named Secret Angel always put his notes from the lectures (Vorlesungen) in her mailbox. That helps her a lot. After exams she gets a internship (Praktikum) in a firm with a well-known attorney (lawayer, defender). Elle can collaborate by a case of a woman who is accused to killed her husband who is a multimillionaire. She wants to prove that fitness queen Brooke Vandermark hasn't killed her husband. Author Amanda Brown was student at Stanford Law School. The book is based on her experiences as a law student. 2) Interpretation a) Characterisation Elle Woods: Elle's favourite
Should We Legalise Drugs
Should We Legalise Drugs? It is a powerful question. One that evokes all kinds of immediate, knee-jerk responses; from "yea, way to go dude!", to "oh my God no, it will destroy this country". But let's try to get past the immediate gut response and look at the situation calmly and coolly. The main fear, and argument against legalisation, is that the number of drug users will increase, perhaps doubling, tripling, or quadrupling; until we become a nation of drug crazed zombies - something approaching "Night of the Living Dead", but presumably without the cannibalism, but who knows. This fear, and much used argument, has no basis in fact or any scientific study. People who are inclined to use drugs are already using drugs. People who are not inclined to use drugs are not using drugs. That won't change once drugs are legal (or decriminalised). It is not as if the law is the only thing stopping drug users from using drugs. For young people, drugs are readily available in college and high school (and probably junior high as well). Kids can go to parties and partake of drugs, mostly marijuana, if they choose - in a fairly safe and secure environment, surrounded by their friends and peers. The last thing on their minds is the law. If a kid in that situation would not use drugs (and most do not); why does anyone think that same kid would use drugs just because they are legal? In
Critique Law and Order.
Lauren Martone 9/17/03 Critique Law and Order For just about as long as I can remember watching TV, it seems, there has been a program called Law & Order somewhere on the dial. As a child I remember my parents always tuning into the latest episode, and so to stay up for evening TV in my household meant watching the show with the "grown-ups," a very desirable thing to do! For those of you unfamiliar with this phenomenon (what, have you been hiding in the woods?), allow me to bring you up to date. It's about cops and crooks, lawyers and plaintiffs, crime and punishment. The stories often come from real-life headlines and although the show has had many different actors come and go over the years, it hasn't seemed to affect its fan base. I'll never forget the first time I watched Law & Order. It was 10:00 PM in the middle of the week and I was only about 10 years old. I was watching a cop show that captured the complete attention of my parents and brother. The fact that they agreed on something made me sit up ant take notice right away. What I was struck by right off the bat was the way it was organized (although I probably didn't realize back then that that was appealing to me), a half-hour of cops, followed by a half hour of lawyers. A neat little package that we all could count on every week. And there was a certain "look" to it, too. Especially in its earlier
In the context of the theoretical proposition on the issue of law and morality, give consideration to euthanasia in the context of discussion in the lectures and readings about law and morality.
In the context of the theoretical proposition introduced in the lecture around the issue of law and morality, give consideration to euthanasia in the context of discussion in the lectures and readings about law and morality. The law is created to reflect the society's norms and mores, thus it is a mistake to see law as a completely separate and self contained system. However there is no single moral view held by the community. Each individual's view varies depending on their social background, gender, race, income social class and education. Additionally not only do people have varies perspectives on the morality of a law but their level of conviction of how morally right or wrong the law maybe. One might say a law is wrong but are able to understand other people's perspective on how it could be right while believe another law is outrageously and scandalously wrong.1 Thus issues such as euthanasia as many cases have shown conflict with what people morally believe the law should be. House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering"2, Problems of euthanasia is ancient but has surfaced in recent years with renewed urgency and relevance and has increasingly debated in the era of growing medical sophistication combined with long life