Should the offence of outraging public decency be abolished? Neil Parpworth reports
In its report Conspiracy and Criminal Law Reform (1976), Law Com No 76, the Law Commission recommended that the common law offence of outraging public decency be abolished. Although this view was expressed more than 30 years ago, the offence remains and outraging public decency has continued to attract criticism in the years that have followed.
In a comment on R (Rose) v DPP [2006] EWHC 852 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 225 (Mar), Professor Ormerod opined that the offence “remains as unsatisfactorily defined as most of the other common law offences” (see [2006] Crim LR 993). Criticisms have also been levelled at the way in which the offence may be used by prosecutors to preclude the availability of statutory defences.
With these criticisms in mind, the latest in a long line of cases, R v Hamilton [2007] EWCA Crim 2026, [2007] All ER (D) 99 (Aug), merits consideration to determine what light it throws, if any, on the elements of the offence of outraging public decency.
R v HAMILTON
The appellant was a barrister
