Reus Penetrates Another Person’ ‘Sexually Sexual penetration extends beyond vaginal penetration by a penis, and does not require the emission of semen: The definition of is similarly inclusive: ‘vagina’ Ibbs v R – On the facts, the sentence was excessive’ because here the factual scenario was not ‘manifestly of the most heinous kind Failing to withdraw when asked is less serious than if no consent was given from the outset That Person’s Consent’ ‘Without Section 36 sets out the statutory definition of consent. It may be contrasted with the previous common law definition, her will’. Today, consent is defined negatively: ‘against R v Papadimitropoulos
Reus ‘Sexually Penetrates Another Person’ Sexual penetration extends beyond vaginal penetration by a penis, and does not require the emission of semen: The definition of ‘vagina’ is similarly inclusive: Ibbs v R – On the facts, the sentence was ‘manifestly excessive’ because here the factual scenario was not of the most heinous kind Failing to withdraw when asked is less serious than if no consent was given from the outset ‘Without That Person’s Consent’ Section 36 sets out the statutory definition of consent. It may be contrasted with the previous common law definition, ‘against her will’. Today, consent is defined negatively: R v Papadimitropoulos
SexualOffences.docx