2003.001 Sexual Ethics and Criminal Law, Lester ... - Francis Bennion

More documents

Recommendations

Info

I acknowledge there is a problem here. A comparatively minute 40. of adults do indeed pursue children in this undesirable proportion Yet we must all preserve a sense of proportion. The best is the way. of the good. Under Gresham's law bad currency drives out enemy law when introduced, at this late day, into the realms of Gresham's sexual behaviour. human Familial sexual abuse of a child 30 Not content with the new o€ences 41. above, the Bill proceeds to duplicate them by creating the outlined new o€ence of ``Familial sexual abuse of a child''. It will further children up to the age of 18 from abuse by a ``family'' protect of any age. This will include all ``who have a `familial' member with a child by virtue not only of blood-ties, adoption, relationship marriage or quasi-marital relationship but also by virtue fostering, living within the same household as the child and assuming a of of trust or authority''. The maximum penalty will be 14 position imprisonment. My criticisms given above also apply here. years Mistaken belief in child's age The Bill proposes changes in the law 42. mistaken belief in a child's age. 31 regarding the o€ences of abuse of a position of trust and familial sexual For of a child, the defendant will have to prove that he held an abuse and reasonable belief in age if he is to be acquitted. We honest it right to put the onus on the defendant in these think because the defendant will normally know the child well circumstances therefore the child's age. 32 and As the white paper says 33 this reverses two House of Lords decisions. 43. It is astonishing. There obviously ought not to be two di€erent White paper, para. 58. 30 See white paper, paras. 56, 57. 31 32 Emphasis added. 33 Para. 57. sound. The Home O ce seem unaware of the terrible dangers of This proposed o€ence certainly over-eggs the pudding. systems regarding mistake in age, for some o€ences requiring the 21
to be proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt matter for others requiring it to be proved by the defendant according and a di€erent standard of proof, the balance of probabilities. This is to recipe for unbounded confusion and is inherently unjust. a it is unsound. If it is proved that the defendant did Furthermore know the child well, and therefore its age, the plea of indeed is likely to be unconvincing and therefore fail. If in fact ignorance defendant, although in a position of trust, did not in know the the child well or at all (as might happen) he should not be particular just because ``normally'' a person in that position would prejudiced Prohibited adult sexual relationships 34 This o€ence, with a maximum 44. of two years imprisonment, will cover sexual activity penalty certain adult ``blood relatives''. The well-known term between is for some unexplained reason dropped. Again the reasons incest involving consensual adults it is generally believed that all Despite behaviour is wrong and should be covered by the criminal such Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that some adult law. relationships are the result of long-term grooming by an familial family member and the criminal law needs to protect adults older abuse in such circumstances. from It is certainly not generally believed that all such behaviour is wrong 45. should be covered by the criminal law. Even if it were, that is and in itself a reason for sending people to prison. Much more not reasoning is required to justify this proposed o€ence, which cogent any case should not be a blanket o€ence covering all types of in activity however trivial. 35 sexual Sexwith mentallydisabled 36 There is to be a new o€ence, carrying life 46. of ``Sexual activity with a person who did not, by imprisonment, White paper, para. 59. 34 See para. 34 in Annex Two to this report. 35 36 Bill, clauses 33-51; white paper, para. 62. know the child well. given display sloppy thinking ± 22
Page 1 and 2: SEXUAL ETHICS AND CRIMINAL LAW A Cr
Page 3 and 4: y Published Publishing Lester PEGAS
Page 5 and 6: and Politics Ethics Sex Code: Moral
Page 7 and 8: The Sex Hate Bill? This report sets
Page 9 and 10: children ± with the intention of m
Page 11 and 12: e clear about its ethical foundatio
Page 13 and 14: ce group on reforming sex o€ences
Page 15 and 16: ``Sexual activity between minors''
Page 17 and 18: A further element is that much publ
Page 19 and 20: Nor in such cases is it ``appropria
Page 21: only arise ``where it is clear that
Page 25 and 26: act in question, though exhypothesi
Page 27 and 28: Sexual interference with human rema
Page 29 and 30: Bill's elaborate de®nition gets us
Page 31 and 32: the disabled? 49 When dealing with
Page 33 and 34: The Bill's proposals relating to se
Page 35 and 36: Obviously in this report I have onl
Page 37 and 38: . . . the ®rst guide to secular se
Page 39 and 40: natures, abortion and pornography.
Page 41 and 42: far the best section of Bennion's w
Page 43 and 44: We should comply with the ethical c
Page 45 and 46: It is immoral, as contravening the
Page 47 and 48: Where it is known or suspected by e

2003.001 Sexual Ethics and Criminal Law, Lester ... - Francis Bennion

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?