R v Mayling
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Date | 1963 |
Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
-
- 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
17 cases
-
Douglas v DPP
...offence is said to be based on a number of old authorities, its modern manifestation in English case-law begins with Regina v. Mayling [1963] 2 Q.B. 717 in which an indictment was preferred against the defendant against whom two police officers gave evidence. They saw him follow a man into......
-
Bita v DPP
...It has long been held that concepts of decency and indecency have been interchangeable. In the English decision of R v. Mayling [1963] 2 QB 717 it was held by the Court of Criminal Appeal in upholding a conviction for outraging public decency that “in addition to publicity as explained abo......
-
Bita v DPP
...... . 20 Turning to the decision in Douglas v. DPP (No.2) [2017] IEHC 248 in which the offence charged was the common law offence of 'outraging public decency'. McDermott J. examined the English authorities starting with R v. Mayling [1962] 2 QB 717 and including Knuller v. DPP [1973] AC 435 (where one of the charges considered was conspiracy to outrage public decency), Regina v. Hamilton [2007] EWCA Crim 2062 , and R v. Gibson [1990] 2 QB 619 . He then went on to consider whether the offence as 'declared and ......
-
R v Simon Austin Hamilton
...by anyone, there was no publicity and that his intention was irrelevant. The judge ruled principally in reliance of the decision in ( [1963] 2 QB 717 R v Mayling (47) Cr.App.R 102) that there was ample evidence upon which a jury could properly infer that the images were taken in public; th......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
-
Sticks, Stones and Words: Emotional Harm and the English Criminal Law
...83 at 494.85 Ibid.86 A. P. Simester and G. R. Sullivan, Criminal Law, Theory and Doctrine, 3rd edn (HartPublishing: Oxford, 2007) 395.87 [1963] 2 QB 717; Knuller v DPP [1973] AC 435.88 Mayling itself involved indecent conduct in a public lavatory, but see also R vCrunden (1809) 2 Camp 89 (n......
-
Treason Versus Outraging Public Decency: Over-Criminalisation and Terrorism Panics
...not outrage any particular person; it need only have the potential to cause outrage to reasonable members of Britishsociety. R v Mayling [1963] 2 QB 717.110. R v Hamilton [2008] 2 W.L.R. 107 at 123.111. R v Gibson [1990] 2 Q.B. 619 at 629.112. R v Hamilton [2008] 2 W.L.R. 107 at 123.34 The ......
-
The Promotion Exams
...on thepartofany observerofthe act, providedthatthe natureofthe act was suchthatpersons would have been disgusted: R. v.Mayling [1963] 2 W.L.R. 709.Forthe purposesofthis crime, a police officer may be disgustedand annoyed, sothatif the only persons who observe the act arepolice officers, the......