- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law-R. v. Matthews (1997)
Citation: R. v. Matthews (John) (1997) - Criminal Case
Key Facts:
Citation: R. v. Matthews (John) (1997) - Criminal Case
Key Facts:
- Victim (V): Male-to-female transsexual.
- Defendant (D): Visited V in her apartment.
- Act: D removed V's clothing, touched her genital area, and forced his penis into her artificial vagina.
- Charge: Rape.
- Defense: D argued that penetration of an artificial vagina does not constitute rape.
- Does penile penetration of an artificial vagina constitute rape under the extended definition of rape in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994?
- Yes. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 extended the definition of rape to include anal rape of a man. This extension should also include "vaginal" rape of a man, because the law intends to protect people who identify as male, from such acts.
- D was convicted of rape.
- This case clarifies the scope of the definition of rape under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
- It extends the definition of rape to include penile penetration of an artificial vagina on a person who identifies as male.
- Transsexual: A person who has undergone gender reassignment.
- Artificial Vagina: A surgically constructed or prosthetic vagina.
- Penile Penetration: Insertion of the penis.
- Rape: Unlawful sexual activity and penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, without their consent.
- Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994: Legislation that extended the definition of rape to include anal rape of a man.
0 Comments