Scottish law creates a framework for resolving some of the disputes between citizens. Contextually, to spur a harmonious society, it stipulates acts deemed illegal and spells out the remedies of punishment to the aggrieved party, society, and the state at large. Illicit drug consumption, underage drinking and sexual encounters, non-consensual sex, and privacy infringement are among the issues evident in Anna and Belinda’s conflict that Scottish laws such as the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 cover. Thus, various Scottish laws demonstrate Anna and Chris’s liability. It will show that Chris is liable for violating privacy and sexual harassment. At the same time, Anna consumed illicit drugs, exposed a minor to alcohol and potentially illicit drugs, and engaged in non-conceptual sex with Belinda, thus amounting to rape. Besides, Belinda is a minor, and the law outlaws senior citizens from engaging in sexual activity with them and thus amounts to defilement.
First, Anna is liable for consuming illicit drugs, probably exposing them to a minor, and purchasing alcohol for her. Under the Scotland Act 1998, illicit class drugs such as heroin and cocaine are illegal. Since she was consuming illicit drugs that are highly addictive, it makes her liable for prosecution. Besides, the Act prohibits the sale and distribution of such drugs for everyone, including minors. The Act asserts that a person possessing illicit drugs is liable and can receive any fine that the court deems suitable, a prison term of seven years of both. Section 261 of the Scottish Licensing Act 2005 prohibits the sale, distribution, or exposure of alcohol to people below 18 years. Belinda is 15 years that disqualifies her from consuming alcohol. The law presumes that such individuals have not developed adequate physical, emotional, and cognitive capabilities to handle the adverse effects of alcohol. Even though it permits minors to consume alcohol, it can only happen with parental consent and in familial setups such as having a meal. The setting was neither familial nor did Anna obtained consent from Belinda’s parents or guardians. Thus, the court can prescribe either a fine, prison term or both it deems suitable for the offence.
Also, Anna is guilty of rape and defilement or assault. Part 4 of the Sexual Offences Act 2009 sets the legal consent age as 16. Any sexual activity between a legal citizen and any person aged below 16 years is considered defilement or assault. Thus, given that Belinda is 15 years, and thus below 16 years, she does not have the legal capacity to provide sexual consent. Contextually, the law presumes that such individuals do not have the physical, physiologic, and emotional capacity to handle sexual activities. Thus, as the section outlines, she is liable for a jail term of up to 10 years and providing other remedies such as treating Belinda for any injuries she incurred during the encounter. Besides, Belinda, as per the Act’s definition, Belinda did not consent that makes Anna liable for rape and assault. The Act’s section 12 asserts that consent should be voluntary, delightful, for specific Act, conscious and not under any influence such as force, coercion or drugs, and any other substances. Thus, the sexual party should have the emotional and intellectual capacity to offer permission. In the case study, Belinda does not qualify to offer conscious consent as she is under the influence of alcohol and potentially other illicit drugs as a minor. She felt dizzy, drowsy, and not emotionally and physically fit, which explains why she felt in a state of waking up to find Anna on top of her. Also, as outlined in sections 2 and 3, the dildo’s nitration is forcible and qualifies as a sexual assault. The rape and assault offences can lead up to a life jail term.
On the other hand, Chris is liable for privacy infringement and sexual harassment through voyeurism and coercion. Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986 prohibits peeping into private residences or property without alarm, leading to shame, distress, or privacy violation. The squeezing of the bed was not a suitable alarm or concern for Chris to peep into Anna and Belinda’s room. Besides, he did not knock on the door to alert the occupants about his presence but peeped through the doorway, amounting to privacy infringement. Also, Chris is liable for sexual harassment offence through coercion and voyeurism. Section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2009 classifies the Act or coercing an individual into having sexual encounters either in their presence or absence as a sexual offence.
Given that Chris watched the sexual encounter for 30 minutes, it infers that he derived some satisfaction from the event. Also, he might have formed some images or imaginations of him having sex with them that the section prohibits. Most importantly, deriving pleasure or satisfaction by watching people have sex without their consent amounts to voyeurism that section 9 prohibits. The offence can lead to a jail term of 6 months or any duration prescribed by the court.
Hence, Anna and Chris bear criminal liability as per various Scottish laws. First, Anna possessed and exposed illicit drugs to a minor. Also, she facilitated a minor accessing alcohol. Also, she committed rape and defilement that qualifies as sexual offences. On the other hand, Chris infringed Anna and Belinda’s privacy while committing sexual harassment through voyeurism and coercion. As elaborated above, they qualify for jail terms, fines, a combination, or other punishments deemed appropriate by the courts. However, Belinda might qualify for mental and psychological therapy to guide her about the dangers of consuming alcohol and illicit drugs and help her recover from the sexual harassment, assault, and rape traumas.
The post Scottish law creates a framework for resolving some of the disputes between appeared first on PapersSpot.
