R v Dica [2004 ] EWCA Crim 1103 PDF

Preview

Summary

case...

Description

England:CourtrulesthatinformedconsenttotheriskofHIV transmissionisvaliddefence Rv.Dica[2004]EWCACrim1103,CourtofAppeal(EnglandandWales)  Parties Theappellant(accused)MohamedDicawasamanlivingwithHIV.Hehadbeen convictedoftwocountsofcausinggrievousbodilyharmundersection20ofthe OffencesagainstthePersonAct1871andsubsequentlyappealedtheconviction.  Outcome TheappealwasallowedandtheCourtorderedanewtrial.  Backgroundandmaterialfacts TheaccusedwasdiagnosedwithHIVinDecember1995andbegantreatment. Followinghisdiagnosis,hehadunprotectedsexualintercoursewithtwowomen, allegedlywithoutdisclosinghisHIV‐positivestatus.Theaccusedtestifiedthatboth womenwereawareofhisHIVinfectionandwerenonethelesswillingtohavesexual intercoursewithhim.ThecomplainantslatertestedpositiveforHIV.  Legalargumentsandissuesaddressed TheCrownprosecutorsallegedthatwhentheaccusedhadconsensualsexual intercoursewiththecomplainants,knowinghewasHIV‐positive,hewasrecklessasto whethertheymightbecomeinfected.Theypositionedthisargumentundersection20 oftheOffencesagainstthePersonAct1871(recklessinflictionofgrievousbodily harm).1AccordingtotheCourt,“[r]ecklessnessassuch,wasnotanissue.Ifprotective measureshadbeentakenbytheappellantthatwouldhaveprovidedmaterialrelevant tothejury’sdecisionwhether,inallthecircumstances,recklessnesswasproved.”  Oneofthemainissuesinthiscasewaswhetherthecomplainants’consenttohavesex withtheaccused,knowingofhiscondition,shouldhavebeenlefttothejury.Thetrial judgehaddecidedthat,whetherornotthecomplainantsknewoftheappellant’s condition,theirconsent,ifany,wasirrelevantandprovidednodefence.Acceptingthe Crown’sargument,thetrialjudgeheldthatcomplainantsweredeprived“ofthelegal capacitytoconsenttosuchseriousharm.”2   1

Anotherissueonappealwaswhethersection20oftheOffencesagainstthePersonAct1871(reckless inflictionofgrievousbodilyharm)couldbeappliedincasesofHIVtransmission.TheCourtofAppealruled thatR.v.Clarence(1989),“suggest[ing]thatconsensualsexualintercourseofitselfwastoberegardedas consenttotheriskofconsequentdisease…[is]nolongerauthoritative.”Asaresult,prosecutionsof peoplelivingwithHIVaccusedofrecklesslytransmittingHIVduringconsensualsexualintercoursewithout havingdisclosedtheirHIVstatuswouldnolongerbelimitedbywhattheCourtdescribedas“outdated restrictions”andcouldbepursuedundersection20. 2 BasedonthedecisioninthecaseofR.v.Brown&ors[1994]1AC212(HouseofLords).

PreparedbytheCanadianHIV/AIDSLegalNetworkforJudgingDuringtheEpidemic:A judicialhandbookonHIV,humanrightsandthelaw.ForthcomingfromUNAIDS,2013

TheCourtofAppeal,however,ruledthatconsenttotheriskoftransmissionthrough consensualsexisavaliddefencetoachargeofrecklesstransmission.Consenttothe riskofinfection,however,wouldnotprovideadefenceincasesofdeliberateinfection orspreadingofHIVwithintenttocausegrievousbodilyharm(casesthatwouldbe prosecutedundersection18oftheOffencesagainstthePersonAct1871).  Basedontheexistingjurisprudence,theCourtfoundthatforpublicpolicyreasons, violentconductinvolvingthedeliberateandintentionalinflictionofbodilyharmisand remainsunlawful,notwithstandingthatitspurposeisthesexualgratificationofoneor bothparticipants.Referringtothecase,theCourtwentontofindthat  itdoesnotfollowfromthem,andtheydonotsuggest,thatconsensualactsof sexualintercourseareunlawfulmerelybecausetheremaybeaknownrisktothe healthofoneorotherparticipant.Theseparticipantsarenotintentonspreading orbecominginfectedwithdiseasethroughsexualintercourse.Theyarenot indulginginseriousviolenceforthepurposesofsexualgratification.Theyare simplyprepared,knowingly,toruntherisk—notthecertainty—ofinfection,as wellasalltheotherrisksinherentinandpossibleconsequencesofsexual intercourse,suchas,anddespitethemostcarefulprecautions,anunintended pregnancy.  Althoughitwouldbeunlikelythatconsentcanbeestablishedunlessthecomplainant wasinformedabouttheriskofasexuallytransmittedinfection,theCourtindicatedthat theultimatequestionisnotknowledgebutconsentandthat,ineverycasewherethis issuearises,thequestionofwhetherthecomplainantdidordidnotconsenttotherisk ofasexuallytransmittedinfectionisoneoffactandcasespecific.  Commentary Fromahumanrightsperspective,therulingthatconsenttotheriskofasexually transmittedinfectionisavaliddefencetoHIVtransmissionchargesinthecontextof consensualsex(unlessthereisadeliberateintentiontospreadingdisease)setsan importantprecedentthatisbothrespectfulofindividuals’privatelivesandautonomy, aswellasthesexualandreproductiverightsofpeoplelivingwithHIV.  WhatremainsuncertainfromtheCourtofAppealdecisionishowconsentcouldbe establishediftheHIV‐positivepartnerhasnotdisclosedtheirstatus.Somemayargue thatconsentingtounprotectedsexmayequatetoconsentingtotheriskofasexually transmittedinfection.However,thisargumentwasrejectedbytheCourtofAppealin thecaseRv.Konzani(2005),whereadistinctionwasdrawnbetween“runningtherisk oftransmission”and“willingly”or“consciously”consentingtotheriskoftransmission ofaparticularinfection,thusestablishingthatconsentmustbeinformed.3  3

Onthisissue,theprosecutorialguidancedevelopedinEnglandandWalesstatesthatinformedconsent totaketheriskofbeinginfectedbyengaginginsexualactivitywithapersonwhoisinfectiousofthe

PreparedbytheCanadianHIV/AIDSLegalNetworkforJudgingDuringtheEpidemic:A judicialhandbookonHIV,humanrightsandthelaw.ForthcomingfromUNAIDS,2013

 Withregardtotheapplicationofsection20oftheOffencesagainstthePersonAct1871, itisinterestingtonotethatnochargesforintentionaltransmission(section18ofthe OffencesagainstthePersonAct1861)haveproceededtotrial.Asofthetimeofthis writing,allHIVexposurecasesintheUnitedKingdomhaveproceededundersection20, whichcriminalisestherecklessinflictionofgrievousbodilyharm. 

 complainantisknowledgeofthedefendant’sspecificinfectedstatus.However,thisdoesnotnecessarily requirethatthepersonlivingwithHIVhasdisclosedtheirHIVstatustothecomplainant;thecomplainant couldhavebeeninformedbyathirdpartyorawarefromothercircumstances.CrownProsecutionService forEnglandandWales(CPS),PolicyonprosecutingcasesinvolvingtheIntentionalorRecklessSexual TransmissionofInfection,(originallypublished2008;updated15July2011).Availablevia www.cps.gov.uk.

PreparedbytheCanadianHIV/AIDSLegalNetworkforJudgingDuringtheEpidemic:A judicialhandbookonHIV,humanrightsandthelaw.ForthcomingfromUNAIDS,2013...