Criminal Law - Class at LHH

Well, its time for some fun post after the much sweet posts dedicated to my special someone. =)

We had criminal law class today and I bet it has to be one of the most funniest, exciting, hilarious, fun-filled and interesting classes yet. We were doing a tutorial question on Sexual Offences. Now, sexual offences is governed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (SOA 2003). This act clearly states the conditions in where an individual can be liable for sexual acts that he carries out on another individual.

As we were going through the question, it came to a point where the class was so hyped-out because the case given was rather stimulating I would say. It was regarding a guy who was deeply involved in a cult, which strongly believes that women always want sex and its the duty of its members to provide such satisfaction.

Discussion was rather slow and quiet at the beginning until a rather simple question was raised and the fun just started. One of my classmate was commenting on the fact that it wasn't stated in the case whether penetration occured (ie: penetration is required to prove an offence under the Sexual Offences Act - depending on the section).

My lecturer then said that he had to agree and it also wasn't really sure if the individual mentioned in the case was a HE or a SHE, or rather a HE-SHE. So, it is fair to say that we cant really prove that penetration had occured. However, he did say that we should always take it as face value, knowing the fact that the act itself, accademically does not accept the situation whereby a man can be raped.

From nowehere, the same classmate made this very interesting and hillarious statement:

Classmate: If that person is a he-she, that person should be called an IT and not HE or SHE. Its an IT.

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!! *seriously hope you guys get the joke*

That's all for now...

CK