When budding lawyers cram for exams the one case they don't struggle to commit to memory is the 1994 student favourite R v Brown. Which is hardly surprising given that it involves a group of aggrieved sadomasochists. The five male defendants were arrested as part of 'Operation Spanner' and later pleaded guilty to assault and wounding offences. But then they appealed against the convictions on the basis that the victim wasn't actually a victim at all. This was because he'd been very happy to have his penis pierced with a fish hook. Very happy indeed. He'd also thoroughly enjoyed the various other forms of genital torture that had been inflicted upon him with spiked gloves and heated wires. Then there was the eye-watering use of a hammer, nail and block of wood. In the end it came down to The House of Lords to decide whether the men did in fact have a case to answer. There was much talk of depravity and an overriding sense of disbelief that anyone would willingly endure the kind of pain experienced in the S&M sessions described. The conclusion was that when serious harm is an issue, consent does not negate the crime. In summing up, a relieved Lord Mustill expressed deep gratitude that the House had been spared the video tapes.....
