On pull in against conviction: Held, allowing the appeal, that there was no evidence that what the appellant did to his wife was any more foul or painful than tattooing, which, if carried go forth with the consent of an adult, did not crap an offence under region 47 of the Act of 1861 albeit that true(a) bodily harm was on purpose inflicted; that there was no wolfish intent on the part of the appellant and it was not in the public interest that such consensual activity among husband and wife in the concealing of the matrimonial collection photographic plate should be a field of study for criminal investigation or prosecution under persona 47; and that, accordingly, the conviction would be quashed (post, pp. 50A-B, E-G). Rex v. Donovan [1934] 2 K.B. 498, C C A . and Reg. v. Brown (Anthony) [1994] 1 A.C. 212, H.L.(E.) distinguished. The following cases are referred to in the judgment: Reg. v. Brown (Anthony) [1994] 1 A . C 212; [1993] 2 W.L.R. 556; [1993] 2 All E.R. 75, H.L.(E.) Rex v. Donovan [1934] 2 K.B. 498, C...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.