Lawyer says consent cannot cover severe violence

A lawyer specialising in sexual-offence cases says an Icelandic Court of Appeal ruling acquitting a man previously sentenced to five years in prison for rape is surprising and does not fit the legal definition of consent. The ruling was reported by mbl.is.

The court’s majority, two of three judges, found it had not been proved beyond doubt that the man intentionally had sex with the woman without her consent. The indictment said he repeatedly hit her in the face, grabbed her by the throat, placed a pillow over her face, making it difficult to breathe, and pressed his knee against her upper chest. The injuries described included fractured ribs, hearing loss and injuries to her head, neck and back.

Karítas Rán Garðarsdóttir, who teaches a course on violent offences from a women’s rights perspective at the University of Iceland’s law faculty, said the ruling appeared to treat consent to some violence for sexual purposes as consent to everything that followed.

Consent can be withdrawn, she said, and does not have to be revoked in specific words. The person must indicate the withdrawal clearly, but the circumstances determine how that is communicated.

Karítas said written communications between the defendant and the woman appeared to indicate consent to some use of force, including being hit and choked. But, she said, those communications did not show consent to violence that could cause the injuries the woman sustained. A person cannot consent to violence so severe that it causes, for example, a broken bone, she said.

She added that sex should not be described as rough when one person is left with broken bones and hearing loss.