Johanna Westeson - The ICHRP

In the Court of Appeal, defence counsel argued that the conviction was unsafe as a result
of this evidence not being admitted. The counsel for the Crown argued that pushed to its
logical conclusion the argument of the defendant would mean that every stripper who
performed at a club would convey the message that she was thereby also consenting to be
touched in a sexual manner by a complete stranger. The Court of Appeal, in looking purely
at the question of relevance (as understood by the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence
Act), declared that “we feel compelled to conclude that as the appellant’s defence was one
based on his honest belief, it is difficult to say that what he contended to have taken place
on the stage could not be relevant.” However, there were several factors in the case that
indicated that the complainant’s alleged behavior on stage had not had any determining
effect on the actions taken by the defendant. For those reasons, it could not be said that the
exclusion of the evidence had rendered his conviction unsafe. The appeal was dismissed.
Responses to sexual violence: sexual offender registration and surgical or chemical
castration
Although most European countries have databases for criminal records, these contain
records of all criminal offences. Few countries have specialized registration for sexual
offenders. A system similar to that employed in the USA – with special sex offender
registries that follow separate rules from other databases for criminal records – has recently
been discussed in Germany. However, the constitutionality of such procedure has been
called into question, and so far no legal measures in that regard have been taken. 558
Nevertheless, separate sexual offender registries exist in Europe. The main difference
between these and their US equivalents is that the European registries are not open for
public inquiry. In the United Kingdom, the Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR) is
a UK-wide database of records of convicted sex offenders, convicted perpetrators of
serious violent crime, and so-called ‘potentially dangerous persons.’ 559 The database,
which is designed to enhance the protection of the public and reduce risk of serious harm,
stores and shares information about the individuals registered in it, but is confidential and
can only be accessed by a limited number of categories: police, probation and prison
personnel (including private companies running prisons). 560
Registry of sex offenders is regulated in accordance with the Sexual Offences Act 2003. 561
All persons convicted under Schedule 3 of the Act – including a long list of sexual
offences – are subject to notification requirements, as well as persons not found guilty of
such an offence by reason of insanity (Section 80). This implies that they must register
with the police and notify them of their names, address, date of birth, national insurance
558 See Deutsche Welle, 13 October 2006, at http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2203141,00.html. Last
last visited on 11 March 2010.
559 ViSOR was created as part of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA), formed under
the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000. Registry under ViSOR is required for “violent and sexual
offenders” as defined by Section 68 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000, and for “potentially
dangerous persons” (non-convicted persons “whose behaviour gives reasonable grounds for believing that
there is a present likelihood of them committing an offence or offences that will cause serious harm;” see
MAPPA Guidance 2009, at
http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Images/MAPPA%20Guidance%20%282009%29%20Version%203%200%20_tcm2
1-120559.pdf. Last visited on 11 March 2010. The application of ViSOR to sexual offenders is regulated by
the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which will be the focus here.
560 Information from the Home Office National Policing Improvement Agency; the agency managing the
database. See http://www.npia.police.uk/en/10510.htm, visited on March 11, 2010.
561 Enacted 20 November 2003.
186