Offences / Liabilities Flashcards
(26 cards)
Sexual Violation by Rape (20yrs)
Section 128(1)(a) CA 1961
A person
Rapes
Another person
Explain Rape
A Person (Proven by JN CE)
Unlawful Sexual Connection (Rape)
Unlawful - Unlawful Sexual Connection
Predator - Penetration - Slightest degree
Goes - Genitalia - Koroheke
Court - Consent - Cox, Koroheke, Gutuama
Chasing - Crown - Crown must prove etc
Chicks - Consent Invalid - Mislead Minds Really Tired Adults Aren’t Informed (MMRTAAI)
**Rape(s)
Penetration of persons genitalia by one’s penis (including any surgically constructed penis)
- Without consent
- Without believing on RG there was consent
Penetration (s2 CA 1961)
Affected by the slightest degree. (Proof by victim statement, admissions, medical exam)
Genitalia (s2 CA 1961)
Koroheke – Reproductive organs internal/external, including the vulva and labia both internal and external at the opening of the vagina.
Consent
Cox – Full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntary given by a person to form rational judgement.
Koroheke – Consent freely given, rather than submission to something unwanted or avoidable.
Gutuama – No reasonable person would think there was consent.
**Crown must prove.
- Complainant did not consent
- Offender didn’t believe they consented
- If he believes she did consent, grounds for belief were unreasonable
S128A consent invalid if; (only if applicable to scenario)
Mislead Minds Really Tired Adults Aren’t Informed
- Mistake ID
- Mistake to nature and quality of act
- Resisting or protest
- Threat, fear, force
- Asleep, unconscious
- Affected by alcohol/drugs
- Intellectual mental/physical impairment
Another Person
Proven by JN CE
RTS
Sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection
Section 128(1)(b) CA 1961
A person
Has unlawful sexual connection with
Another person
Explain:
Unlawful sexual connection
Unlawful sexual connection (s128 CA 1961)
- Introduction into genitalia or anus by part of another’s body, object or mouth. Excl legit medical exams etc. (s2 CA1961)
- No consent
- No belief, on reasonable grounds, there was consent given
Assault with Intent to Commit Sexual Violation
Section 129(2) CA 1961
A person
Assaults
Another person
With Intent to Commit Sexual Violation
Explain Assault
As per s2 CA1961, the application or attempted application of force to a person of another, directly or indirectly
RTS
With Intent to Commit Sexual Violation
Intent – Intent to commit the offence and intent to get a specific result.
R v COLLISTER – Actions or words before/during/after, surrounding circumstance and the nature of the act infer intent.
Sexual violation – A person rapes or has unlawful sexual connection with another person.
Rape – A person penetrates another person’s genitalia without their consent and without reasonable grounds for belief that there was consent.
Consent – a conscious and voluntary agreement to something desired or proposed.
R v COX – consent should be full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntary given by someone capable of forming rational judgement.
R v GUTUAMA – The crown ned to prove under the objective test that no reasonable person in the accused shoes could think that the complainant consented.
R v KOROHEKE – Consent should be freely given, rather than an admission to something unwanted or unavoidable.
It must be proven that
The defendant intended to sexually violate the victim
That the complainant did not consent
That the defendant did not believe on reasonable grounds that the victim was consenting.
RTS
Incest
Section 130(1) Crimes Act 1961
A person
Has Sexual Connection
With a Parent or Child or Sibling or Half Sibling or Grandparent
Person charged knew of the relationship
Explain Has sexual connection with
- Introduction into genitalia or anus by part of another’s body, object or mouth. Excl legit medical exams etc. (s2 CA1961)
Penetration (s2 CA 1961)
Affected by the slightest degree. (Proof by victim statement, admissions, medical exam)
Consent
Cox – Full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntary given by a person to form rational judgement.
Koroheke – Consent freely given, rather than submission to something unwanted or avoidable.
Gutuama – No reasonable person would think there was consent.
RTS
And the Person charged knew of that relationship
Forrest & Forrest (person charged is over 16)
RTS
Sexual Conduct with a Dependant Family Member
Section 131(1) Crimes Act 1961
A person
Has Sexual Connection
With a dependant family member
Over the age of 16
Explain Has sexual connection with
- Introduction into genitalia or anus by part of another’s body, object or mouth. Excl legit medical exams etc. (s2 CA1961)
Penetration (s2 CA 1961)
Affected by the slightest degree. (Proof by victim statement, admissions, medical exam)
Consent
Cox – Full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntary given by a person to form rational judgement.
Koroheke – Consent freely given, rather than submission to something unwanted or avoidable.
Gutuama – No reasonable person would think there was consent.
RTS
Explain With a dependant family member
S131A – demonstrate the nature of the relationship I.e. how they meet the criteria of a dependant family member
RTS – (cover off relationship / some degree of authority/dependency)
Explain under the age of
Forrest & Forrest (Victim aged 16 – 17 years)
RTS
Sexual conduct with child under 12
Section 132(1) CA 1961
A person
Has Sexual Connection
With a Child under 12
Explain Has Sexual connection with
Sexual connection (s2 CA 1961)
Introduction into genitalia or anus by part of another’s body, object or mouth. Excl legit medical exams etc.
Penetration
Affected by the slightest degree. (Proof by victim statement, admissions, medical exam)
Genitalia (s2 CA 1961)
Including constructed organs - any gender.
Koroheke – Reproductive organs internal/external, including the vulva and labia both internal and external at the opening of the vagina.
S132(4) – not a defence they believed child was over 12
S132(5) Consent is not a defence.
RTS
Explain a Child Under 12
Child
Under 12 years old – Gender neutral.
Forest and Forest – Best possible evidence adduced from age.
RTS
Sexual conduct with child under 12
Section 132(1) CA 1961
A person
Has Sexual Connection
With a Child under 12
Indecent Act with child under 12
Section 132(3) CA 1961
A person
Does an Indecent Act
With a Child under 12
Explain Does an Indecent Act With
Indecent act (s2 CA 1961)
- Does indecent act on another
- Permits person to do indecent act on them
Court – Conduct that right-thinking people will consider an affront to the sexual modesty of complainant.
Dunn – Indecency must be judged in light of the time, place and circumstances.
S132(4) – not a defence they believed child was over 12
S132(5) Consent is not a defence.
RTS
Explain A child under 12
Child
Under 12 years old – Gender neutral.
Forest and Forest – Best possible evidence adduced from age.
RTS
Sexual conduct with young person under 16
134(1) CA 1961
A person
Has sexual connection with
A young person
Explain Has sexual connection with
Sexual connection (s2 CA 1961)
Introduction into genitalia or anus by part of another’s body, object or mouth. Excl legit medical exams etc.
Penetration
Affected by the slightest degree. (Proof by victim statement, admissions, medical exam)
Genitalia (s2 CA 1961)
Including constructed organs - any gender.
Koroheke – Reproductive organs internal/external, including the vulva and labia both internal and external at the opening of the vagina.
Consent r v Cox – (must be present or 128 offence applies)
Defences
134A – Consent / Offender must take reasonable steps to find out age / believe on reasonable grounds at the time that the young person was over 16.
s134(4) – not married to the young person at the time
RTS
Explain A young person
Young person (134(6) CA 1961)
Under 16 years – Gender neutral.
Forest and Forest – Best possible evidence adduced from age.
RTS
