英语论文网

讨论强奸起因及协同参与的法律论文

很多人认为，强奸犯是具有变态的思维和行为的性心理变态。然而，研究否定了这个谣传。看上去强奸犯的出身不仅具有不同的背景，而且来自不同年龄段，同时其通常也不是精神病。这个谣传表明我们可以很容易地识别出强奸犯，他们与我们所知道的和信任的人不同，不过正如Wilson指出，大多数强奸犯都是普通常见的男性，这不是说他们是'强奸犯'，但他们只是具有强奸了某人的行为的普通常见的男性。

要理解强奸法的演变，就必须定义能代表当今局面的法律。大多数司法管辖区，强奸被定义为未经他人同意就与他人的性交或进行另一种形式的性侵。[3]它是法定罪行，由（最近的立法）2003年性侵犯法案第1节（2003 年法案）确立，该法案2004年5月1日生效。它废除了几乎所有与性罪行的现行法例。

Discussion Of Reas And Consent Involved In Rape Law Essay

Many people think that rapists are sexual psychopaths with perverted thoughts and actions. Research, however, disagrees with this myth. It appears that rapists come from, not only, different backgrounds but are also from different age groups and usually not mentally ill. This myth indicates that we can easily recognise a rapist and that they are different from the people we know and trust and as Wilson observes, the majority of rapists are regular common men and that it is not that they are ‘rapists’ but that they have just raped someone as regular common men.

To understand the evolution of rape law, it is imperative to define the law as it stands today. Rape is defined in most jurisdictions as sexual intercourse or another form of a sexual penetration with another person without their consent. [3] It is a statutory offence and is created by (the most recent legislation) Section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (the 2003 Act), which came into force on the 1st May 2004. It repealed nearly all of the existing law in relation to sexual offences.

history

“…[rape] is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent” [4]

The above famous dictum was stated by Sir Matthew Hale (Hale), Lord Chief of the Kings Bench in the eighteenth century [5] . This dictum was a warning against the false rape complainant, which found its way into judicial opinions and special jury instructions. [6]

Hale’s dictum was later expanded by John Wigmore (jurist and expert in the law of evidence) in the 19th century, who stated that “where the charge is a rape, the doing of the act being disputed, it is perhaps still theoretically possible that the intent should be in issue; but practically, if the act is proved, there can be no real question as to intent; and therefore the intent principle has no necessary application” [7]

This then brings us onto the Actus Reus (guilty act) and Mens Rea (guilty mind) of rape.

Mens Rea

The ‘mens rea’ element of rape, which refers to the state of mind of someone who commits a crime, was not always required for liability. However, now, the mens rea of a sexual offence, or its ‘mental element’, is a key factor in establishing whether or not a crime has been committed.

The requirement for mens rea was introduced in the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (the 1956 Act), which stated that rape is committed “…at the time he (the person committing the crime) knows that the person (victim) does not consent to the intercourse or is reckless as to whether that person consents to it, [8] this went on to show that the mens rea of rape can be both intent and recklessness. The element of recklessness was established in the case of Cunningham [9] in 1957, where the Court of Appeal held that “malice must not be taken as to mean 'wickedness', but as requiring either (1) an intenti