How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 70528
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice
12826847
Type Your Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

I would liked clarity on the rape poor graphs law please

Resolved Question:

I would liked clarity on the rape poor graphs law please
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, my name is***** am a qualified solicitor and it is my pleasure to assist you with your question today. Can you please provide more details of your query?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
sorry bad predictive texting, I'm confused about the new rape pornography law does this include simulated acts as well?
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Thank you I will pass this on to a colleague who is a criminal lawyer
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Ok thank you
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
No problem
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
Hi. That would be me. What type of pornography are you thinking of?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Hi, if an individual went onto a mainstream gay website and watched four clips of compilations of different mainstream videos depicting male rape and rough sex is this illegal?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I know the films are not illegal but it was extracted for the prime purpose of sexual arousal.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I'm talking about section 37 of the new act which I thought was still being discussed I didn't know it is actually now a las since April 2015!
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Law sorry
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
A depiction of rape or assault by penetration without consent is now unlawful. Although they need the consent of the DPP to prosecute which is almost never available.
Rough sex is lawful.
Depictions of serious violence is not. That would involve things like mutilation though. Rough sex alone is not sufficient.
Obviously everybody does need to be an adult.
Can I clarify anything for you?
Jo
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Would they actively be looking for these types of offences? I can't find a prosecution for this yet. Also would you clarify the defence defined in the act itself to me looks like if it came to court the defendant has to prove no one is harmed but in that case why bother making it illegal if the defence can always be used for true depictions? This an act which makes itself obsolete?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Hold on I just want to clarify these are actors they are not actually being raped, which too right should be illegal. You said wihtout consent in your response, consent is assumed by it being a classified film scene?
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
No, not at all. It is all a nonsense waste of time and money.
On your first point, all this really does it reassert the old law in the Obscene Publications Act which was perfectly adequate to cover the issue but apparently not good for the Witch Hunter General and his disciples.
The defences set down that a person in possession has to prove that the actions depicted were consensual. So a reverse burden of proof.
On your second point, I understand - depictions of offences. The concern being that they might actually have to prove that something amounted to a rape before there could be a prosecution.
I'm afraid that campaigners on these topics don't seem to much like having to actually prove wrong doing and would prefer that everybody was burnt at the stake on an allegation only.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
So in the case of depictions of rape from mainstream films it is my burden to prove that no one was actually harmed or is it the CPS's to prove there was a rape?
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
There is a specific exception for classified films. They are not affected.
In fairness to Parliament, they have walked the tight rope quite well between the witch finders and genuine freedom of expression.
It will only cover pornographic matter and it will be a defence to prove that images did not actually involve a rape - I would expect the providers of pornography to amend and adept to that and to place the user in a position where they can do that.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
But if extracts from classified films are taken out of its original context the. This exception is removed, is this correct? I was on a gay porn website.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
No.
Classified films are classified films whether a short image is shown or the whole film.
I am a criminal hack of long standing and all that is being prosecuted at the moment are sexual offences, even though there is a disproportionate amount of complete fantasy and lies, and I haven't seen one single allegations of nonsense and I don't know anybody who has. It is going to have almost no impact at all and, in fact, it really just makes it an offence under S63 rather than under the old OPA.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
So even if these short classified film clips were on a gay website portrayed in a sexual context it is not illegal? apologies I know you are an expert I'm just trying to understand and reassure myself
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
Yes, I understand.
Clips from classified films are still part of classified films and could not become anything else in any way that I can see.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
My last question then please if I may, why in the extreme pornography guidance from the cps in classified films exception say this: The exclusion does not apply in respect of images contained within extracts from classified films which must reasonably be assumed to have been extracted solely or principally for the purposes of sexual arousal.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
Probably because they haven't updated their site yet in line with the law.
They might have resources to do that if they didn't prosecute such nonsense.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
They updated the guidance it for the 2015 law, confusing! Thank you for your time
Expert:  Jo C. replied 1 year ago.
No problem and all the best.
Please remember to rate my answer.
Remember that I am always available to help with your questions. Even if I am in Court I will usually pick up a question within 12 hours. For future information, please start your question with ‘For Jomo1972’.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 70528
Experience: Over 5 years in practice
Jo C. and other Law Specialists are ready to help you