Apparently in recent times, the US, Canada and UK, have loosened sexual assault laws to include touching minor incidents, touching a woman’s breast and butt which even in a single instance which can leave the perpetrator with a criminal record as a sex offender. Even in children under 18…
Is this true?
I need a cite that such is happening in Canada please. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I’m gonna need more than, ‘apparently’.
Please show me exactly what you’re referring to.
At common law, battery was defined as the slightest “unwanted” touch. So no its not new.
Secondly, most sexual assault laws that I have seen require the accused to have intended to gain or to give sexual gratification by so touching. This is mens rea, the mental element that most crimes need to have, and what most hysterical readings of such laws conveniently emit.
Maine has a law against “unlawful sexual touching” which basically means any unwanted “touching of the breasts, buttocks, groin or inner thigh, directly or through clothing, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire.” Depending on circumstances, it is a class D crime (maximum sentence 12 months plus $2,000 fine) or class E crime (up to six months plus $1,000). Title 17-A, §260: Unlawful sexual touching
“Rape” is a term no longer used in Maine’s criminal justice system. “Gross sexual assault” is essentially the same thing. It is a class A, B, or C crime depending on the circumstances with maximum penalty of 30 years plus a fine up to $50,000 if class A. Title 17-A, §253: Gross sexual assault
For the purposes of indecent assault laws in Australia, as a general proposition there needs to be a sexual component to the touching, but prima facie that is satisfied without the need for further proof of malign intent where the body parts touched are the obvious ones - genitals, buttocks and (in women) breasts.
Circumstances of ambiguity can arise. Common among them are medical or quasi medical practitioners who abuse their trust by performing fraudulent “treatment”, but where mere evidence of the parts touched, in the nature of things, might hypothetically have an innocent explanation. In those cases, it is necessary to affirmatively prove a purpose of gaining sexual gratification on the part of the accused.
Canada has a sex offender registry, but AFAIK this only involves people convicted of serious crimes and likely to re-offend. We haven’t descended to the level of the USA (and I imagine most other countries can say the same). Your life is not ruined for public urination or being a normal teenager engaged in sexual activity with peers at 15, you do not have to register, stay 500 yards from schools and playgrounds, publicly identified and hounded out of all municipalities and forced to live under a bridge in a cardboard box.