R v Flattery (1877)

Court: Court of Crown Cases Reserved

Facts: The defendant, John Flattery, pretended to be a doctor at a market stall in York. A 19-year-old woman (V), accompanied by her mother, consulted Flattery for her perceived illness, suffering from fits. Under the guise of carrying out a surgical operation, Flattery engaged in sexual intercourse with V.

Issue: Whether the complainant's submission to sexual intercourse could be considered consent when it was obtained through fraud.

Held: Flattery was guilty of rape; there had not been consent.

Key Judicial Statements: Mellor J stated, “It is said that submission is equivalent to consent, and that here there was submission: but submission to what? Not to carnal connection.” The judge clarified that the complainant had consented to medical treatment, not sexual intercourse.

The decision reinforced the legal principle that consent obtained through fraud, where the complainant was deceived about the nature of the act, does not constitute lawful consent in cases of sexual assault.

💡 Leveluplaw: underscores the critical distinction between consent and submission, particularly in instances where fraud is involved. The court established that consent must be informed and voluntary; any deception that alters the nature of the act precludes genuine consent.