sexual offences - ages

NoQuarter

hey all, that time of year again for myself,

im wading through my notes here on sexual offences, mainly rape and rape under section 4 and i cant seem to pick out the age limits that are law today.

can anyone lay them out for me???

and what happens of a girl of age has consensual sex with a boy under 16??

thanks,
stew.

pirelli

king-stew wrote: »

hey all, that time of year again for myself,

im wading through my notes here on sexual offences, mainly rape and rape under section 4 and i cant seem to pick out the age limits that are law today.

can anyone lay them out for me???

and what happens of a girl of age has consensual sex with a boy under 16??

thanks,
stew.

In most countries there is a rule of peer. So nothing should happen if she was within that peer age group. It was recommended by the LRC to be over 4 years in ireland.

So a 5th year school student having sex with a first year college student might be reasonable if their is a respectable peer relationship.

A 25 year old exploiting a 4th year school student for sex would be wrong and should be an indictable offence.

NoQuarter

Thanks thats a helpful point, when you say the LCR recommended it, do you know if it has been incorporated into statute in ireland??

and did the law in realtion to statutory rape change recently to allow for a defence???


so many questions, so little time! (exam tomorrow :eek:)

smileykey

There was a big thing about this in the news maybe two years ago, in which they had to review the laws and change them because a peadophile got out because the law was discriminatory by nature, i.e. boys would be breaking the law in situations where girls wouldn't have been. I don't know the facts but maybe if you did a search of the Irish Times website you'd find what I'm talking about?

pirelli

king-stew wrote: »

Thanks thats a helpful point, when you say the LCR recommended it, do you know if it has been incorporated into statute in ireland??

and did the law in realtion to statutory rape change recently to allow for a defence???


so many questions, so little time! (exam tomorrow :eek:)

Is not the best course to find the most recent law and work from that.


Last May, the Supreme Court ruled in CC v Ireland that section 1(1) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1935 was unconstitutional because it did not afford defendants the right to claim that they had made an honest mistake as to the age of a victim.

A convicted statutory rapist appealed successfully his conviction on the grounds that he had not been afforded the defence of mistake of age.

The decision provoked a political crisis after a number of child rapists sought their freedom on the basis that the offence, because it had been struck down by the Supreme Court, was non-existent. Following the ruling, the Government announced it would hold a referendum on children's rights.

Restored

Under government plans to enshrine children's rights in the Constitution, revealed last Monday, Ireland's statutory rape regime will be restored.

The defence of "honest belief" as to age will be removed and if passed, the referendum will allow the Oireachtas to create new crimes of absolute or strict liability. It will also allow for the collection and exchange of "soft information" on suspected child abusers.


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/statutory-rape-law-fiasco-led-to-drop-in-reporting-56087.html

pirelli

king-stew wrote: »

Thanks thats a helpful point, when you say the LCR recommended it, do you know if it has been incorporated into statute in ireland??

and did the law in realtion to statutory rape change recently to allow for a defence???


so many questions, so little time! (exam tomorrow :eek:)

LRC Law reform commission:This was made almost 15 years ago. Most countries use it and i am not sure ireland does now.

NoQuarter

ok thanks again,

so finally just to lay it out because im expecting a question tomorrow with various ages in it so am i right in saying:

Boys under 12 cant commit rape (in a legal sense)

statutory rape can be commited on boys and girls under the age of 17, consent is irrelivant.

and in the case of a woman of age and a boy under 17?? 15?? that there is no statutory rape but a sexual assault may have been committed??

anything im forgetting??

Tom Young

King-stew, I am beginning to think you're a lazy s*&!:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055278310&highlight=sexual+offence

The bulk of the LRC stuff is recommendation only. CC v. Ireland modified matters a lot. I should say this was in-fact legislative reform rather than directly from the judgment, but it did stem from same.

Tom

NoQuarter

Tom Young wrote: »

King-stew, I am beginning to think you're a lazy s*&!:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055278310&highlight=sexual+offence

The bulk of the LRC stuff is recommendation only. CC v. Ireland modified matters a lot. I should say this was in-fact legislative reform rather than directly from the judgment, but it did stem from same.

Tom

Your only beginning to think that?!??! Tom you should have just asked and i would have admitted it!!

Time for a re-reg perhaps :eek:

No i have done quite a bit or research but when its all new its a lot to take on board, im thinking along the lines on gettin a qustion like this:

One week before his 15th birthday, Ralph attends an over-18s disco. He starts chatting to Lisa, who is 16 years of age. At the end of the evening, Lisa invites Ralph back to her house. Her parents and siblings are away for the night, and she has the place to herself. As soon as they arrive in the house they start to kiss and cuddle. The following conversation ensues:
Lisa: ‘Now, Ralph, I’m not interested in a one-night stand.’
Ralph: ‘Nor am I, Lisa.’
Lisa: ‘I’m on the look-out for a committed relationship.’
Ralph: ‘Lisa, I think you’re hot. Maybe I’m the one for you.’
Lisa: ‘If you could promise me that this will be long-term, I think we could go all the way tonight.’
Ralph: ‘I promise, Lisa.’
Ralph and Lisa then engage in sexual intercourse.
The next morning, Lisa is aghast to find no-one on Ralph’s side of the bed. She telephones him immediately to ask him where he is. ‘C’mon, Lisa’, he replies, ‘you didn’t really think that I meant what I said, did you?’ Lisa is upset. She rushes to the local Garda station and makes a complaint that Ralph raped her.
Answer both (a) and (b).
(a) Is Ralph guilty of rape? Explain your answer.

(17.3 marks)

(b) Is Lisa guilty of any offence(s)? Explain your answer.


The problem is the fact that she is older is throwing me off, im aware she cant be convicted of rape but is she guilty of sexual assault because she is older??

she consented to sex, regardless of his lies, so i would think he is not guilty of rape?

Appreiciate all the advice folks!

Vainglory

Looks to me like a Ciaran Patton classic.

Ralph

Is he guilty of rape?

Criminal Law Rape Act 1981

The key issue here is if the sex was consensual. The actus reus of rape is non-consensual sexual intercourse.(S2 SS1 1981)

The traditional scenarios that negate consent are fraud as to identity, or fraud as to the nature of the act.

Note the recent comments of Murray J in the C case which are particularly relevant to this scenario and seem to extend the traditional grounds somewhat. “if fraud as to material fact would negataise the presence of consent”. Discuss whether prospect of long term relationship amounts to a 'material fact' which would negate the consent in this case.

Note also the Papadimptropolous case.

Highly unlikely any jury would convict of rape in these circumstances - would be very harsh.

Note also DPP v Morgan - belief as to consent does not have to be reasonable, just honestly held.

Is he guilty of any other offence?

Section 3 of the Criminal Law Sexual Offences Act 2006
Sexual relations with a child under the age of 17

The sexual intercourse was consensual, but this is not relevant.

His defence would be to rely upon the “honest belief” principle after CC v Ireland and talk about how she was at over 18s disco, house was supposed to be hers etc.

Lisa

Lisa is not guilty of an offence under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006 Act because of S5 of that Act states that a female child under the age of 17 years shall not be guilty of an offence under this act by reason only of engaging in an act of sexual intercourse. Does not apply to anything else, e.g. buggery. It was designed so as not to stigmatise teenage pregnancy, single mothers.

Is she guilty of any other offence?

However Lisa is guilty of a technical breach of S2 of the Criminal Law Rape Amendment Act 1990 which covers sexual assault. Ralph's consent is irrelevant as he is under 15. (Criminal Law Amendment Act 1935 Section 14)

Lisa’s defence would rely upon the issue of “honest belief” as to Ralph's age.(PG v Ireland). She would probably have a good chance of succeeding as he was at an over 18s disco.

You might mention that it would be unlikely that charges would be brought in this scenario.

I've done this pretty quickly but I think it's more or less correct, obviously a bit of padding needed and some more case law on the consent issue.

NoQuarter

Excellent reply, thank you very much!

Vainglory

You're welcome now go study

Good luck he's a horrific marker! If it is him, I'm just guessing as they look like his questions.

Victor

Vainglory wrote: »

Lisa’s defence would rely upon the issue of “honest belief” as to Ralph's age.(PG v Ireland). She would probably have a good chance of succeeding as he was at an over 18s disco.

Given the facts (shes older but under 18, her house, her invitation) this defence seems poor - she knows that under-age people can get into over-18s disco, because she has done it herself. Certainly her defence is probably weaker than his.

Vainglory

Point taken, but that's the defence she'd raise anyway.

OP how did the exam go?

NoQuarter

well chaps,

The question wasnt sooo bad but it was quite unusual, it was neither a problem question or an essay!

It basically entailed john(17) slept with amy(14 turning 15 the next day), broke up, slept with marie(16) she got pregnant, then he had anal + oral sex with sarah(16).

Discuss any criminal liability arising!

i had F all time left by the time i came to it so i didnt answer it too well at all but hopefully ive done enough!

Thanks for all the help again!

P.s, John is a legend!

Victor

king-stew wrote: »

P.s, John is a legend!

... in C Wing.

lancer326

Hey all. new poster here.

King-stew you are wrong. boys under 12 can commit rape. Section 129 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 (which substitutes section 52 of the Children Act 2001) provides that a child under 12 years of age shall not be charged with an offence. but this is subject to subsection 2 of the newly substituted section 52 which priovides that Subsection (1) does not apply to a child aged 10 or 11 years who is charged with murder, manslaughter, rape, rape under section 4 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990 or aggravated sexual assault.

hope this clarifies the matter.

NoQuarter

lancer326 wrote: »

hope this clarifies the matter.

Thats great mate but my exam was last week!! :D

Thanks for the confidence boost though!!!