R v Brown
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1889 |
| Year | 1889 |
| Court | Court for Crown Cases Reserved |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
19 cases
-
Haughton v Smith
...than an intent. 21 It was not long, however, before the decision in Collins (supra) was challenged by Lord Coleridge C.J. in Brown (1889) 24 Q.B.D. 357 at p. 359 as "no longer law", but without giving reasons and in Ring (1892) 17 Cox Crim. Cas. 491 at 492 (an early "mugging" case on the Me......
-
Anderton v Ryan
...to reverse the law, originally declared in Reg. v. Collins, 9 Cox C.C. 497, mistakenly thought to have been overruled by Reg. v. Brown (1889) 24 Q.B.D. 357, but reaffirmed in Smith's case, that the pickpocket who puts his hand in an empty pocket commits no offence. Putting the hand in the p......
-
Erskine v Goel
...Haughton v. Smith has, in no uncertain manner, overruled the authorities of R. v. Ring, (1892) 17 Cox C.C. 491, and R. v. Broom, (1899) 24 Q.B.D. 357, which held the contrary, and approved of the older ones of R. v. Collins, (1864) 9 Cox C.C. 497 and McPherson, (1857) Dears. & B. 197. Ring ......
- Stanley Erskine v Jaiprakash Goel
Get Started for Free
3 firm's commentaries
-
What is the law and penalties for bestiality in NSW?
...which isn't defined in the legislation, but is under the common law, specifically as the sexual penetration of any animal (R v Brown (1889) 24 QBD 357). The law on bestiality is contained in sections 79 and 80 of the Crimes Act Any person guilty of bestiality in NSW will face a maximum pena......
-
What is the law and penalties for bestiality in NSW?
...which isn't defined in the legislation, but is under the common law, specifically as the sexual penetration of any animal (R v Brown (1889) 24 QBD 357). The law on bestiality is contained in sections 79 and 80 of the Crimes Act Any person guilty of bestiality in NSW will face a maximum pena......
-
The law, penalties and defences for making bestiality pornography in NSW
...'Bestiality' is not defined in the Act, but under common law is defined as 'sexual intercourse with an animal'; see R v Brown (1889) 24 QBD 357. The common law has has found that bestiality is not limited to sexual penetration to an animal – it can include acts of oral sex and manual stimul......
4 books & journal articles
-
The Doctrine of Incapability and the Emperor's New Clothes: A Protected Defendant or Non-Existent Offences?
...... but prisoner ‘pleaded guilty to that which, if he had known it, was not an offence, and not supported by evidence of an offence’ ((1889) 24 QBD 357 at 359). In Clark, Lord Cockburn CJ refused to quash the conviction that had followed a guilty plea, holding that the prisoner ‘must to be ......
-
Larceny
...person puts his hand into an empty pocket ofanother with intent to steal, he may be convicted of attempting tosteal, R. v. Brown (1889), 24 Q.B.D. 357.(b) Not from Person: To take a wallet containing money from thepocket of a jacket temporarily discarded by another would not belarceny from ......
-
The Police and the Law
...it was ruled that it was not indictable toattempt to pick a pocket which turned out to be empty.Inview of the decisions in R. v. Brown (24 Q.B.D. 357) and R.v. Ring (17 Cox491)it is generally considered that this is notnow the law and that a man may be convicted of attemptingto commit a cri......
-
The Peeping Tom: A Practical Problem
...legally be attempted although thecommission of the substantive offence is not practicable.Inthisrespect we have the case of R. v. Brown (24 Q.B.D. 357 (overrulingR. v. Collins, 33L.J.177)) wherein it was held that if a person putshis hand into the pocket of another with intent to steal what......