The Student Room Group

A couple of really quick questions please? Criminal sexual offences.

Hello, some clarification would really be appreciated here:

Does s.63 of Sexual Offences Act 2003 - Trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence - apply to attempted rape? Or just to sexual assault? I'm getting my head in a little bit of a twist with it :smile:

And s.74 & 75 of SOA 2003. Do they apply to attempts, i.e. while one would need to provide evidence that consent was given if the rape had gone ahead, does it still apply to attempted rape?

Thanks in advance for any answers.
Reply 1
Original post by Fulltilt11
Hello, some clarification would really be appreciated here:

Does s.63 of Sexual Offences Act 2003 - Trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence - apply to attempted rape? Or just to sexual assault? I'm getting my head in a little bit of a twist with it :smile:

And s.74 & 75 of SOA 2003. Do they apply to attempts, i.e. while one would need to provide evidence that consent was given if the rape had gone ahead, does it still apply to attempted rape?

Thanks in advance for any answers.


As a matter of construction, s 63 must apply to attempted rape. Section 63(2) provides that "relevant sexual offence" has the same meaning as in section 62. Section 62(1) provides, "a person commits an offence under this section if he commits any offence with the intention of committing a relevant sexual offence". An attempt is a more than merely preparatory act (Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s 1(1)) carried out with the intent to commit an indictable offence. Rape is an indictable offence. A person who commits attempted rape has ex hypothesis committed an offence and must have, again ex hypothesi, the intent to commit rape. Therefore, attempted rape is a relevant sexual offence under s 62(1) and thus under s 63.

As far as s 74 and s 75 go, what is the relevant mens rea for attempted rape? It must be intent to penetrate the complainant and a lack of a reasonable belief in consent. The prosecution must prove that the defendant did not have a reasonable belief that the complainant was consenting. Whether the defendant's belief was reasonable is determined according to the (respectively) evidential and conclusive presumptions in ss 75 and 76, then falling back on the general principle in s 74. So yes, ss 74 and 75 must apply to attempts in so far as they determine whether the defendant had the requisite mental state to be liable for attempted rape.
(edited 12 years ago)
S.63 applies to any sexual offence within Part I of the SOA 2003.

Think about this logically - is someone really likely to say, "Well, I'm going to break into that house over there. I'm going to attempt to rape the girl inside. I'm not going to succeed though. Let's just see how far I get before someone calls the police?" If this person attempts to rape the victim, they intend to commit rape. It therefore follows that if you enter the house with the intention of raping but you don't succeed, it might be an attempted rape BUT you have the intention to rape and therefore S.63 applies. How it ends doesn't matter - you just need the intention.

I'd guess the presumptions do apply to rape.
Reply 3
Thank you very much for the quick reply and clarification guys, it's appreciated.
Sorry to comment on a old thread can someone tell me if section 63 is basic or specific intmet crimes, as I will need to adress a possible defence for intoxication??
Original post by gethsemane342
S.63 applies to any sexual offence within Part I of the SOA 2003.

Think about this logically - is someone really likely to say, "Well, I'm going to break into that house over there. I'm going to attempt to rape the girl inside. I'm not going to succeed though. Let's just see how far I get before someone calls the police?" If this person attempts to rape the victim, they intend to commit rape. It therefore follows that if you enter the house with the intention of raping but you don't succeed, it might be an attempted rape BUT you have the intention to rape and therefore S.63 applies. How it ends doesn't matter - you just need the intention.

I'd guess the presumptions do apply to rape.


Sorry to comment on a old thread can someone tell me if section 63 is basic or specific intmet crimes, as I will need to adress a possible defence for intoxication??
Reply 6
Intoxication is not a defence. A drunken intent is still an intent (R v Dietschmann)

Hope that helps.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Mimir
Intoxication is not a defence. A drunken intent is still an intent (R v Dietschmann)

Hope that helps.


So would it be a specific intent crime? Or basic?

Latest

Trending

Trending