"Sir Igor, president of the Queen's Bench Division, pointed out that neither Mr Bree nor M had acted unlawfully in drinking to excess. "Both were free, if they wished, to have intercourse with each other," he said.
The question was not whether the alcohol made them less inhibited, nor whether they might have regretted what had happened. Nor was it a question of whether they had behaved irresponsibly.
"The essential question for decision is, as it always is, whether the evidence proved that the appellant had sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent," he said."
Nice to know some people can still think for themselves.
The question was not whether the alcohol made them less inhibited, nor whether they might have regretted what had happened. Nor was it a question of whether they had behaved irresponsibly.
"The essential question for decision is, as it always is, whether the evidence proved that the appellant had sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent," he said."
Nice to know some people can still think for themselves.
