NCSF on TwitterSubscribe to the NCSF RSS FeedNCSF Blog

NCSF Headlines
Monday, 20 February 2012 00:30

California v Samuels

Written by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

An early, and typically bad, example of a pure “consent is no defense” ruling is People v Samuels, a 1967 California decision.  In that case, Martin Samuels was convicted of assault based on his conduct in a film of an apparently consensual BDSM scene.  The court not only rejected the consent defense, but also appeared to hold the view that any such consent would be “some form of mental aberration”:

Even if it be assumed that the victim in the ‘vertical’ film did in fact suffer from some form of mental aberration which compelled him to submit to a beating which was so severe as to constitute an aggravated assault, defendant's conduct in inflicting that beating was no less violative of a penal statute obviously designed to prohibit one human being from severely or mortally injuring another.

People v. Samuels  250 Cal.App.2d 501, 514, 58 Cal.Rptr. 439, 447 (Cal.App. 1967)

The Samuels decision was cited as recently as 2006, in People v Febrissy.

Click to open California v Samuels PDF

 

Read 18398 times Last modified on Monday, 20 February 2012 01:09
More in this category: Massachusetts v Appleby »
Login to post comments