Obscene Publications Act 1959 and Obscenity Law

Section 1 of OPA

It is an offence to publish content that would ‘deprave or corrupt persons who are likely to see it’ for gain

R v Penguin Books

Deprave means to make morally bad or pervert

Perrin v UK

Audience does not need to be large - one person is enough

DPP v Whyte

Argument that audience is already corrupt is not a valid defence

Hicklin

There is no requirement of intention to deprave

Handyside v UK

Ruled that OPA is compatible with the ECHR

Defences to OPA

• Did not know the content was obscene

• Public good e.g. science, art

Outraging public decency offence

AR = Indecent, obscene or disgusting behaviour or displays that may cause offence to members of the public

MR = No requirement to intend to outrage, just intending to display or do the conduct enough

R v Gibson & Sylviere

Outraging public decency can be used against art when it satisfies the elements

Conspiracy to corrupt public morals - Created in Shaw v DPP

AR = Agreement to carry out course of conduct that would corrupt people

MR = Intent to corrupt

Possession of extreme pornography CJIA s.63

It is an offence to be in possession of extreme pornographic images.

Definition of ‘extreme image’ under s.63 CJIA

Threatens lives, could result in serious injury, non-consensual, corpses, animals or is ‘grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character.’ It doesn’t matter if it is fake.

Defences for possession of extreme pornography

1. Legitimate reason for possession

2. D had not seen the image or knew it was pornographic (Pin Chen Cheung)

3. Image received unsolicited and not retained for ‘unreasonable time’