R v Williams
Consent obtained by deceiving a person about the nature of the act is not real consent.
Facts
Mr Williams was a singing teacher. He told a 16 year old pupil that her breathing was not right and that he needed to perform an operation to improve her voice. He then had sexual intercourse with her. She did not understand that what he was doing was sexual intercourse, believing that it was a medical procedure. He was convicted of rape.
Legal principle
The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld his conviction. The girl had consented to what she believed was a surgical operation to improve her breathing, not to sexual intercourse, so she had been deceived about the nature of the act. Consent obtained by a deception as to the nature of the act is not real consent. The principle is now found in section 76 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which creates a conclusive presumption of lack of consent where the defendant intentionally deceived the complainant as to the nature or purpose of the act.
Related cases on sexual offences and consent
- Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [2011] EWHC 2849 (Admin)
- R (F) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 945 (Admin), [2014] QB 581
- R v B [2006] EWCA Crim 2945, [2007] 1 WLR 1567
- R v Bree [2007] EWCA Crim 804, [2008] QB 131
- R v Devonald [2008] EWCA Crim 527
- R v H [2005] EWCA Crim 732, [2005] 1 WLR 2005
- R v Jheeta [2007] EWCA Crim 1699, [2008] 1 WLR 2582
- R v Lawrance [2020] EWCA Crim 971, [2020] 1 WLR 5025
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
