R v Clarkson [1971] 3 All ER 344
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:02:30 UTC
Defendants watched X rape a woman and did nothing to stop him. However they did nothing to encourage the rape nor was there evidence to show that they intended to encourage the rape.
They were convicted but CA quashed convictions on basis that intent and act of encouragement had to be proved (not mere presence).
Of course there could be instances where mere presence was the purpose of the event (e.g. illegal prize fighting) and could be construed as encouragement. Not the case here.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
R v Khan
Sexual offenses, including rape, hinge on the concept of consent—whether the act was agreed upon willingly or affirmatively. Attempted rape occurs when someone takes significant steps towards committ...
R v Bainbridge
Defendant bought equipment for X, which X used in a crime. The judge said that it was sufficient for prosecution to show that D knew of X’s intention to commit a crime of the type which was committed...
R v Gianetto
Defendant was charged with murdering V and judge said it was open to jury to convict if they were satisfied that Defendant had at least been an accessory, if not the principal. CA dismissed appeal, s...
R v Olugboja
This was a case where a man told a woman that he would have sex with her (this was after his friend, as he knew, had raped Defendant the same evening, and had now dragged Victim’s friend into the bed...
R v JF Alford Transport
Defendants worked for a company and turned a blind eye to their truck drivers working longer hours than was allowed by EC regulations. In these circumstances CA quashed their convictions as accessori...
Related free notes samples
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.