s.9

July 17, 2015

When dismissing an appeal against conviction for sexual activity involving children, including rape and trafficking within the UK for sexual exploitation, the court considered the issue of consent. Where a vulnerable or immature individual had allegedly been subjected to grooming for sexual purposes, the question of whether real or proper consent had been given would usually be for the jury to decide, unless the evidence clearly indicated that proper consent had been given.

CONSENT CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DE MINIMIS ENGAGING IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY IN PRESENCE OF CHILDREN GROOMING OF VULNERABLE OR IMMATURE PERSONS FOR SEXUAL PURPOSES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN RAPE REAL OR PROPER CONSENT s.1 s.1(1) s.10 s.101 s.11(1) s.3 s.58 s.58(1)(a) s.59A s.9 SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.58(1) TRAFFICKING FOR SEXUAL EXPLOITATION YOUNG OFFENDERS

September 5, 2014

A sentence of four years’ imprisonment imposed after trial for indecent assault was unduly lenient where the offender, who was akin to a stepfather to a seven-year-old child, had committed sexual acts against her, forcing her to perform oral sex on him. A sentence of seven years’ imprisonment was substituted.

CHILD SEX OFFENCES FOUR YEARS’ IMPRISONMENT INDECENCY INDECENT ASSAULT OFFENDER FORCING SEVEN-YEAR-OLD GIRL TO ENGAGE IN ORAL SEX s.9 SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.7 UNDUE LENIENCY

June 18, 2008

It was compatible with a child’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.8 to convict him of rape contrary to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.5 in circumstances where the agreed basis of plea established that his offence also fell properly within the ambit of s.13.

art.6(2) art.8 BASIS OF PLEA CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONDUCT FALLING WITHIN AMBIT OF S.5 AND S.13 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 CRIMINAL CHARGES CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.6(1) HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTIFICATION LAWFULNESS OF PROSECUTOR’S DECISION TO PROSECUTE UNDER S.5 Part 2 PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE PROPORTIONALITY RAPE RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE s.13 s.9 s.9(1)(c)(ii) Sch.1 Sch.3 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.5 STRICT LIABILITY YOUNG OFFENDERS

November 20, 2006

It was not for the courts to assess the reasons behind the prosecution’s decision to charge an individual under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.8 rather than s.5 or s.9 and, in the circumstances, a sentence of five years’ imprisonment imposed on the individual was not manifestly excessive.

APPROPRIATENESS OF PROSECUTION CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DECISIONS TO PROSECUTE MITIGATION s.5 s.9 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.8

s.9

Contact Stephen