Turn on thread page Beta

B1346 - Police Act (Amendment) bill 2018 watch

    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joep95)
    R v Bree says otherwise.

    "[W]hen someone who has had a lot to drink is in fact consenting to intercourse, then that is what she is doing, consenting: equally, if after taking drink, she is not consenting, then by definition intercourse is taking place without her consent." (R v Bree [2007] EWCA Crim 256 [a])

    In this case replace intercourse with seconding.
    Translation:

    Ruling on the issue of consent in such cases, Sir Igor said: "If, through drink - or for any other reason - the complainant has temporarily lost her capacity to choose whether to have intercourse on the relevant occasion, she is not consenting, and subject to questions about the defendant's state of mind, if the intercourse takes place, this would be rape.
    "However, where the complainant has voluntarily consumed even substantial quantities of alcohol, but nevertheless remains capable of choosing whether or not to have intercourse, and in drink agrees to do so, this would not be rape."
    "We should perhaps underline that, as a matter of practical reality, capacity to consent may evaporate well before a complainant becomes unconscious."

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/mar/27/law.ukcrime
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Nay.

    also lol @ 'cops'

    Just go the whole hog and replace it with 'pigs'.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, what a reprehensible bill given that they risk their lives to protect us
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    If this makes division I'll be voting against.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I agree there needs to be protections for the police in place, however, it would be unacceptable if a punishment was harsher because the victim was a police officer.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob E)
    I agree there needs to be protections for the police in place, however, it would be unacceptable if a punishment was harsher because the victim was a police officer.
    An assault on a police officer acting in their official capacity is an assault on law and order and the justice system more generally. This is what justifies it. If the defendant is unaware that the victim was an officer, my understanding is that the sentencing would be unaffected.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    An assault on a police officer acting in their official capacity is an assault on law and order and the justice system more generally. This is what justifies it. If the defendant is unaware that the victim was an officer, my understanding is that the sentencing would be unaffected.
    I do not see an assault on law and order as any more serious than an assault on a law-abiding citizen on the street or at home.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob E)
    I do not see an assault on law and order as any more serious than an assault on a law-abiding citizen on the street or at home.
    Social cohesion depends to some extent on people having respect for authority. That is damaged when police are assaulted.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Social cohesion depends to some extent on people having respect for authority. That is damaged when police are assaulted.
    An assault on law and order is an assault on a concept, where an assault on a citizen is an assault on human life. As human life possesses more value than a conception, in the case of an assault on a police officer the more serious crime would be punished which is an assault against life, meaning the punishment becomes the one for an assault against life. I would be tempted to levy an extra punishment for a crime of an assault on law and order to be able to charge the defendant for two crimes, however, as the extent of law and order can be debated it would be difficult to draw the line.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Joep95)
    Drunken consent is still consent.

    Equalising the law between police and the lay person, just because it doesn’t have a notes section doesn’t mean there isn’t a section that says what the bill does that’s what the “A BILL TO” section is for
    I believe it could be called to question whether I was actually capable at the time, considering I would've done anything that night, I possibly could argue that I wasn't capable.

    However, I can't be ****ed, so **** it, it stays.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob E)
    An assault on law and order is an assault on a concept, where an assault on a citizen is an assault on human life. As human life possesses more value than a conception, in the case of an assault on a police officer the more serious crime would be punished which is an assault against life, meaning the punishment becomes the one for an assault against life. I would be tempted to levy an extra punishment for a crime of an assault on law and order to be able to charge the defendant for two crimes, however, as the extent of law and order can be debated it would be difficult to draw the line.
    This is why we oughtn't have a separate offence, and instead take it into account when sentencing.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    The amount of hate crime and harassment police officers receive from a days work is unimaginable unless experienced at first hand. The fact is it is rising, surely we must protect those who protect us and surely we must deter people from assaulting our officers.

    A strong Nay from me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The PoliticalGuy)
    The amount of hate crime and harassment police officers receive from a days work is unimaginable unless experienced at first hand. The fact is it is rising, surely we must protect those who protect us and surely we must deter people from assaulting our officers.

    A strong Nay from me.
    Why do you not believe these protections should be applied to all emergency services then?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    This is why we oughtn't have a separate offence, and instead take it into account when sentencing.
    (Original post by Tanqueray91)
    I believe it could be called to question whether I was actually capable at the time, considering I would've done anything that night, I possibly could argue that I wasn't capable.

    However, I can't be ****ed, so **** it, it stays.
    I should have asked for more then, I’d fancy my chances in that case
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 04MR17)
    If this makes division I'll be voting against.
    Why?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CatusStarbright)
    Here's a link to the relevant provision, I'll do Joe's job for him: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/89

    I don't see the point in removing this.
    I wouldn’t say doing that is a bill writers job it’s just courteous
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CatusStarbright)
    Here's a link to the relevant provision, I'll do Joe's job for him: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/89

    I don't see the point in removing this.
    I wouldn’t say doing that is a bill writers job it’s just courteous

    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    No. There need to be additional punishments for attacks on police to discourage people from assaulting them, given that they risk their lives to protect us.
    Why not the rest of the emergency services as well?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Joep95)
    I wouldn’t say doing that is a bill writers job it’s just courteous
    It's rather an important thing to include given that the House will need to see exactly what provision is being repealed before being able to assess whether they support the repeal or not.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Joep95)
    Why?
    Because I disagree with the changes this makes.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CatusStarbright)
    It's rather an important thing to include given that the House will need to see exactly what provision is being repealed before being able to assess whether they support the repeal or not.
    If people are capable of finding tsr they should be capable of using google
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 18, 2018
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.