Doctor Essay

2382 WordsJun 11, 201410 Pages
Rape within marriage Lord Lane C.J., Sir Stephen Brown P., Watkins, Neill and Russell L.JJ. 1991 July 1; Oct. 23 Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook, Lord Griffiths, Lord Ackner and Lord Lowry Crime - Sexual offences - Rape - Husband and wife living apart - Husband attempting sexual intercourse with wife against her will - Whether husband immune from charge of attempted rape - Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 (c. 82), s. 1(1) The defendant married his wife in 1984. As a result of matrimonial difficulties the wife left the matrimonial home in 1989 and returned to live with her parents, informing the defendant of her intention to petition for divorce. The defendant also communicated to the wife his intention to "see about a divorce." While the wife was staying at her parents' house, the defendant forced his way in and attempted to have sexual intercourse with her, in the course of which attempt he assaulted her. He was charged on indictment with rape and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The judge rejected his submission that by virtue of section 1(1) of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 the offence of rape was one which was not known to the law where the defendant was the husband of the alleged victim. He thereupon pleaded guilty to attempted rape and assault occasioning actual bodily harm and was convicted. On the defendant's appeal against his conviction of attempted rape, the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) dismissed the appeal. On appeal by the defendant: - Held, dismissing the appeal, that there was no longer a rule of law that a wife was deemed to have consented irrevocably to sexual intercourse with her husband; and that, therefore, a husband could be convicted of the rape or attempted rape of his wife where she had withdrawn her consent to sexual intercourse; that section 1(1) of the Sexual Offences

More about Doctor Essay

Open Document