Hamilton, R v

Hamilton, R v

The public element of outraging public decency is satisfied if the act is done where persons are present and the nature of what is being done is capable of being seen by two or more persons, even if not actually seen. The jury was entitled to convict as the filming was capable of being seen in a public place. Joinder of counts was proper due to the nexus of sexual gratification, and the judge's refusal to sever was within discretion. The total sentence was reduced as consecutive sentences made the overall term too long.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Simon Austin Hamilton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part
Legal Topics
Outraging Public Decency, Indecent Images of Children, Joinder and Severance of Counts, Sentencing
Criminal Law Outraging Public Decency Indecent Images of Children Joinder and Severance of Counts Sentencing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Simon Austin Hamilton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's conduct amounted to outraging public decency where no one actually saw the act
  2. 2 Whether the counts of outraging public decency should have been joined with other counts
  3. 3 Whether the judge wrongly exercised discretion in refusing to sever the counts

Ratio Decidendi

The public element of outraging public decency is satisfied if the act is done where persons are present and the nature of what is being done is capable of being seen by two or more persons, even if not actually seen. The jury was entitled to convict as the filming was capable of being seen in a public place. Joinder of counts was proper due to the nexus of sexual gratification, and the judge's refusal to sever was within discretion. The total sentence was reduced as consecutive sentences made the overall term too long.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part

Orders

  • Conviction on counts 11-15 (outraging public decency) upheld
  • Joinder and refusal to sever counts upheld