R. v. Hutchinson: Fraud in Sexual Assaults
This paper is a proposal for the research paper assignment for Criminology 300W. Its primary goal is to outline the case of R. v. Hutchinson which deals with the issue of gender violence, and offers relevant theoretical explanations for explaining what happened and why it happened. More specifically, it focuses on sexual assault and what constitutes fraud in obtaining consent. After a brief case overview, it will introduce three significantly different theoretical perspectives that all try to explain the origins, causes and effects of sexual assault.
Case Overview
Craig Jared Hutchinson, a Nova Scotia man, was convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to an 18 month prison sentence (Blackwell, 2013). …show more content…
v. Cuerrier (and the 3 part Cuerrier test) was what prompted the change in how Canadian courts interpreted fraud and consent. Firstly, the SCC highlighted that the aforementioned legislation was too restrictive for labeling a behavior as fraud. Secondly, it mandated that consent was invalid only when deception was “coupled with a significant risk of serious bodily harm as a result of sexual touching” (R. v. Hutchinson. 2014, para. 34). Deceit on its own does not make sex a criminal act, although it might provide grounds for a civil lawsuit. Thirdly, the complainant’s consent must be a result of this deceit (R. v. Hutchinson, 2014, para. 34). Only when all three elements are present, can a person be convicted of sexual assault by fraudulently obtaining consent.
The second step in the Cuerrier test is essential to linking it to the Hutchinson case because of how harm is defined. While Cuerrier dealt with the potential harm of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, Hutchinson did not physically or psychologically inflict pain on his girlfriend. The SCC bypassed this issue by defining the effects of the victim’s pregnancy as a type of bodily harm (R. v. Hutchinson, 2014, para. 69-70). The reasoning was that pregnancy has its risks and a women’s body goes through significant hormonal and psychological …show more content…
The contemporary wave of feminism has created vast social change on how sexual assaults are defined and treated by legal professionals and society. The main goals of feminism are to redefine the patriarchal dogma on the rate, causes and effects of rape (Chasteen, 2001, pp. 102-103). This is largely done by framing rape as a social problem that has historically remained unaddressed by the dominant male discourse. From their perspective, it is the most extreme expression of male power and gender inequality (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). As such, rape is redefined as a crime against women that is a direct and almost absolute consequence of the male needs for dominance and aggression (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). In addition, the feminist anti-rape movement postulates three key ideas, namely: any women can be a victim by virtue of being a woman, any man can be a rapist by virtue of being a man, and that there is a different types of sexual assault that need to be considered (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). This perspective ties in nicely with the Hutchinson case because it highlights how the law has changed over the past few decades to accommodate the feminist social movement. As feminists consider lack of consent as a central part of the act of sexual assault, it is extremely important to understand what consent is and what is not. Also, the distinctiveness of contraception tampering, which happened in the Hutchinson case, allows
This paper is a proposal for the research paper assignment for Criminology 300W. Its primary goal is to outline the case of R. v. Hutchinson which deals with the issue of gender violence, and offers relevant theoretical explanations for explaining what happened and why it happened. More specifically, it focuses on sexual assault and what constitutes fraud in obtaining consent. After a brief case overview, it will introduce three significantly different theoretical perspectives that all try to explain the origins, causes and effects of sexual assault.
Case Overview
Craig Jared Hutchinson, a Nova Scotia man, was convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to an 18 month prison sentence (Blackwell, 2013). …show more content…
v. Cuerrier (and the 3 part Cuerrier test) was what prompted the change in how Canadian courts interpreted fraud and consent. Firstly, the SCC highlighted that the aforementioned legislation was too restrictive for labeling a behavior as fraud. Secondly, it mandated that consent was invalid only when deception was “coupled with a significant risk of serious bodily harm as a result of sexual touching” (R. v. Hutchinson. 2014, para. 34). Deceit on its own does not make sex a criminal act, although it might provide grounds for a civil lawsuit. Thirdly, the complainant’s consent must be a result of this deceit (R. v. Hutchinson, 2014, para. 34). Only when all three elements are present, can a person be convicted of sexual assault by fraudulently obtaining consent.
The second step in the Cuerrier test is essential to linking it to the Hutchinson case because of how harm is defined. While Cuerrier dealt with the potential harm of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, Hutchinson did not physically or psychologically inflict pain on his girlfriend. The SCC bypassed this issue by defining the effects of the victim’s pregnancy as a type of bodily harm (R. v. Hutchinson, 2014, para. 69-70). The reasoning was that pregnancy has its risks and a women’s body goes through significant hormonal and psychological …show more content…
The contemporary wave of feminism has created vast social change on how sexual assaults are defined and treated by legal professionals and society. The main goals of feminism are to redefine the patriarchal dogma on the rate, causes and effects of rape (Chasteen, 2001, pp. 102-103). This is largely done by framing rape as a social problem that has historically remained unaddressed by the dominant male discourse. From their perspective, it is the most extreme expression of male power and gender inequality (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). As such, rape is redefined as a crime against women that is a direct and almost absolute consequence of the male needs for dominance and aggression (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). In addition, the feminist anti-rape movement postulates three key ideas, namely: any women can be a victim by virtue of being a woman, any man can be a rapist by virtue of being a man, and that there is a different types of sexual assault that need to be considered (Chasteen, 2001, p. 106). This perspective ties in nicely with the Hutchinson case because it highlights how the law has changed over the past few decades to accommodate the feminist social movement. As feminists consider lack of consent as a central part of the act of sexual assault, it is extremely important to understand what consent is and what is not. Also, the distinctiveness of contraception tampering, which happened in the Hutchinson case, allows