Conditional Consent and Sexual Crime: Time for Reform?

Statistics published by the government in 2021 highlight serious problems in England and Wales with a drop in prosecutions of sexual crimes. Part of this issue is attributed to the complexities around sexual consent and public understanding of it. This article highlights a particular problem in the law around conditional consent. It shows that the law on conditional consent is completely incoherent, complicating efforts to increase public education on the matter. The law is also limited in its protection of sexual autonomy of victims, as well in its protection of victims against pregnancy. Critics of reform warn against overcriminalisation of rape, and against imposing morals on society. However, it is argued that given the current reality of how rape is dealt with in England and Wales, these concerns should not prevent reform to the law of conditional consent. The article ends by arguing that reform should be carried out to make the law on conditional consent more coherent and to take account of pregnancy as a consequence of sexual intercourse.

Expert Evidence, Hearsay and Victims of Trafficking

Case commentary of the Court of Appeal ruling in R v Brecani [2021] EWCA Crim 731.

The Myth of Madness: Murderous Mothers and Maternal Infanticide

The sex-specific doctrine of infanticide provides a merciful method of dealing with women who kill their newborn children in circumstances of psychological distress. This article examines the contentious medical rationale which underpins infanticide legislation with the purpose of providing a substantiated argument for the abolition of this antiquated doctrine. Specifically, a two-pronged approach is taken. First, by utilising the views of contemporary medical science, the scientific credibility of the medical rationale is scrutinised. Second, by drawing upon feminist legal theory, a myriad of concerns associated with the medicalisation of female offenders are critically discussed. Ultimately, it is suggested that the offence/defence of infanticide should be abolished and that crimes of this nature should be readily subsumed under the current partial defence of diminished responsibility.

Liable for Unlawful Assembly and Riot by Virtue of Liking or Comment on Social Media Platforms?

In Secretary of Justice v Tong Wai Hung [2021] HKCA 404, the Hong Kong Court of Appeal affirmed that the doctrine of joint enterprise, as a matter of statutory construction, is applicable onwards to the offences of unlawful assembly and riot under the Public Order Ordinance (Cap. 245), and physical presence at the crime scene is not a pre-requisite to establish liability. The Court argued that such an interpretation strikes a balance between public order concerns and the need to avoid the risk of over-charging. This note contends that the Court of Appeal’s decision will risk exposing numerous citizens, who can hardly be said to share culpability comparable to that of the actual and principal perpetrators of unlawful and riotous assemblies, to prosecution and conviction on questionable legal and evidential basis.

Allowing a Defence to Those Who Commit Crime Under Coercive Control

Abused women who are coerced to commit crime have no adequate legal defence. Historically, martial coercion may have been pled, but since its repeal and lack of replacement, abused women have been left without adequate protection in the criminal justice system. Duress would seem to be the logical defence in such a situation, but its construction by the courts means that women are still left with no defence. If a woman resists the coercion to commit crime, and instead protects herself against the abuse, she will equally have no suitable defence. Parliament were presented with the opportunity to rectify this problem when passing the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, but despite the Lords’ support, proposals were rejected by the Commons. Whilst research shows that crime committed under coercive control is not an insignificant problem, the current law does not protect some of the most vulnerable from prosecution.

Sentence reductions for a guilty plea: The impact of the revised guideline on rates of pleas and ‘cracked trials’

In 2017, the Sentencing Council introduced a revised guideline for plea-based sentence reductions. The revisions were designed to provide greater certainty and to accelerate the timing of guilty pleas. Late pleas resulting in ‘cracked trials’ have long been a problem in the court system. The guideline was not intended to change the rate of defendants who plead guilty, but rather to increase the percentage of pleas entered early in the criminal process. This brief article reports findings from an analysis of data from the Crown Court before and after the introduction of the revised sentencing guideline. Findings reveal that the overall guilty plea remained stable over the period 2014–2019. The guideline appears to have had no effect on the timing of guilty pleas entered, and in fact the percentage of ‘cracked’ trials rose in the post-guideline period.