About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


44 Medico-Legal J. 1 (1976)

handle is hein.journals/medlgjr44 and id is 1 raw text is: THE MEDICO-LEGAL JOURNAL Founded 1901 Vol. 44 1976 Part One EDITORIAL Rape THIS EMOTIONAL topic has recently been much in the news and a good deal of misinformation and prejudice has been expressed and many opinions, some well-informed and others less well-informed, have been liberally made part of the public diet. It is refreshing, therefore, to be able to read the Report of the Advisory Group on the Law of Rape*, which has managed to achieve much in a short time. The Advisory Group under the distinguished Chairmanship of Mrs. Justice Heilbron was appointed in July 1975 to give urgent con- sideration to the law of rape in the light of recent public concern and to advise the Home Secretary whether early changes in the law are desirable. Much of the recent public debate on the topic of rape was triggered by the case of the Director of Public Prosecutions v. Morgan and Others [1975] 61. Cr. App.R.136, and the Advisory Group was asked in particular to consider whether any change in the law of rape was desirable as a result of the judgement in Morgan. In this case the House of Lords considered as a matter of law in rape, the position of a man who believed, though mistakenly, that the woman alleging rape consented to sexual intercourse. Their Lordships decided by a majority that the crime of rape consisted in having sexual intercourse with a woman with intent to do so without her consent or recklessly, not caring whether she consented or not. A man could not commit rape if he did not have that essential guilty or criminal mind-the mens rea. If therefore, an accused had a genuine belief that the woman consented, whether or not that belief was based on reasonable grounds, he could not be found guilty of rape, as the existence of such a belief negatives the guilty mind. They further decided that the reasonableness or otherwise of the belief was a factor, but only one which the jury had to take into account; but in the light of all the evidence it would have been unlikely in * Cmnd. 6352 1975.