This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

R v Flattery [1877] 2 QBD 410

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 07:02

Judgement for the case R v Flattery

KEY POINTS

  • Rape is a heinous crime that inflicts severe trauma, violating an individual's autonomy and well-being with non-consensual and forcible acts. Society rightfully condemns it, recognizing the need to protect individuals from such egregious violations.

  • Consent is crucial in healthy and respectful sexual encounters, representing the unequivocal agreement of all parties involved. It is an ongoing process emphasizing clear communication and mutual understanding to foster positive and consensual relationships.

  • Submission in intimate relationships should always be rooted in mutual agreement and respect, involving a consensual choice made freely and without coercion. Healthy submission thrives on open communication, trust, and a shared understanding of boundaries, creating an environment of safety and mutual satisfaction.

  • Carnal connection under the pretense of a surgical operation introduces a disturbing concept of deceit and unethical behavior, exploiting trust by falsely presenting a medical pretext for a sexual encounter. This breach underscores the importance of transparency, honesty, and ensuring full informed consent in all aspects of intimate relationships, upholding principles of trust and respect.

FACTS

  • John Flattery ('Prisoner') asserted a provision of medical and surgical guidance in exchange for financial compensation. Lavinia Thompson (‘Prosecutrix’), a 19-year-old girl, sought his advice concerning an illness she was experiencing. The Prisoner recommended a surgical operation and, under the false guise of performing the procedure, engaged in carnal connection with the Prosecutrix.

  • The Prosecutrix submitted to the actions not to permit sexual engagement but under the belief that the prisoner was solely providing medical treatment and conducting a surgical operation.

  • This belief was deliberately and fraudulently induced by the Prisoner, highlighting a willful and deceptive manipulation of trust on his part.

JUDGEMENT

  • In the judgment, it was held that the accused, the Prisoner, was found guilty of the crime of rape.

  • This conclusion was based on the deliberate and fraudulent actions undertaken by the accused, who, under the pretense of providing medical advice and performing a surgical operation, engaged in carnal connection with the prosecutrix.

  • The court determined that the Prosecutrix's submission was obtained through willful deception and exploitation of trust, constituting a violation of the principles of consent. As such, the accused was declared guilty of the offense of rape.

COMMENTARY

  • The case involving John Flattery referred to as the 'Prisoner,' and Lavinia Thompson, the Prosecutrix, revealed a disturbing abuse of trust and authority. Flattery, who claimed to offer medical and surgical guidance in exchange for compensation, exploited this position to commit a grave offense. The Prosecutrix, a 19-year-old seeking legitimate medical advice, fell victim to Flattery's deceitful actions.

  • Flattery's recommendation of a surgical operation served as a pretext for engaging in a carnal connection with the Prosecutrix. This reprehensible act went against the principles of trust and consent in any ethical society. Under the false belief that she was receiving medical treatment, the Prosecutrix unwittingly became a victim of Flattery's deceptive manipulation.

  • The court's judgment rightfully declared Flattery guilty of rape, emphasizing the intentional and fraudulent nature of his actions. The ruling acknowledged that the Prosecutrix's submission was coerced through deception and exploitation of trust, constituting a clear violation of the fundamental principles of consent.

  • This case underscored the importance of safeguarding vulnerable individuals from abuses of power and deception in professional relationships, highlighting the legal consequences for those who breached their trust.

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS

  • A girl submitted to Defendant for an operation and did not resist when he penetrated her, thinking that he was merely enacting the operation.

  • The QBD ruled that consent had to be to a specific act, so that though she consented to the operation, she did not consent to the sexual intercourse, so the Defendant was guilty of rape. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on R v Flattery

GDL Criminal Law Notes
551 total pages
76 purchased

A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...

Criminal Law Notes
1,072 total pages
662 purchased

Criminal Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...

Criminal law Notes
80 total pages
8 purchased

In depth notes with lecturer and textbook comments included as well as ...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started

Related Product Samples

These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.

GDL Criminal LawSexual Offences Notes (9 pages)
Criminal lawSexual Offences Notes (13 pages)
Criminal LawSexual Offences Short Notes (11 pages)
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Criminal Law Notes
1,072 total pages
662 purchased

Criminal Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...