What I'd like to do...

in my next part of my submissions is to try to illustrate how this case is an illustration of the problems with my friend's approach.

Because if you consider what happened in this case, if you accept for a moment that the Crown does have to prove this knowledge element, as this jury was charged.

The jury is told there are five elements, the three actus reus elements, intentional touching, and number five is knowledge.

So what is the jury actually left to decide on this question? And at this point, then, the jury has already gone through...

Here we go.

The jury has already determined the first four elements.

sexual assault with the idea that it would be dealt with as an assault so the governing paradigm was assault different levels of gradation based on extra violence and and harms caused does the law of intent around just a common assault help us at all in terms of the mens rea for sexual assault