New English and Welsh legislation

[typhoon2]

Yesterday new laws came into being, intended to prevent domestic ***, that will affect kinksters within England and Wales (and probably the rest of the UK soon). In particular breath-players will find their kinks outlawed. Please make yourselves aware of the new laws and adapt accordingly. There's no point in moaning about them - that fight has been lost - but knowledge will hopefully keep you out of trouble.

 

Links are not allowed so search for Domestic *** Act 2021.

[ey****]

the clue is in the name - the Domestic *** Act 2021 - it passed into law on 29th April 2021 - so has been a law for well over a year

It does not outlaw breath play or other types of play

it instead closes up a loophole known as the 'rough sex defence' that there were people who killed, or seriously injured, a partner during kink play and used "she likes rough sex" in their defence - in some cases, they actually got off

this does not outlaw anything - it instead removes the "but she likes rough sex" as a form of defence for those defending domestic *** or kink-related manslaughter charges 

[ca****]

8 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

the clue is in the name - the Domestic *** Act 2021 - it passed into law on 29th April 2021 - so has been a law for well over a year

It does not outlaw breath play or other types of play

it instead closes up a loophole known as the 'rough sex defence' that there were people who killed, or seriously injured, a partner during kink play and used "she likes rough sex" in their defence - in some cases, they actually got off

this does not outlaw anything - it instead removes the "but she likes rough sex" as a form of defence for those defending domestic *** or kink-related manslaughter charges 

Thank you for explaining this so well.

[Domanaut]

11 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

the clue is in the name - the Domestic *** Act 2021 - it passed into law on 29th April 2021 - so has been a law for well over a year

It does not outlaw breath play or other types of play

it instead closes up a loophole known as the 'rough sex defence' that there were people who killed, or seriously injured, a partner during kink play and used "she likes rough sex" in their defence - in some cases, they actually got off

this does not outlaw anything - it instead removes the "but she likes rough sex" as a form of defence for those defending domestic *** or kink-related manslaughter charges 

Thank you for fully enlightening this situation

[CopperKnob]

Yeah, it's been about since last Spring. Whilst it doesn't "outlaw" breath play, non fatal strangulation is in there as a criminal offence.
Given that is only been a year, I'd suggest that theres very little case law currently as to how it's being interpreted by the Courts. Time will tell.
It's always good to have an awareness of changes to the law as long as you have the correct information as opposed to rumours/misinformation.
I would suggest that anyone on Fet has a basic understanding that BDSM or at least the SM side of things is a very difficult scenario given that, in the eyes of the law, no one can consent to being harmed. A lot of other legislation will come into play in relation to that, with challenges on both sides but, essentially, the bottom line is only ever play with informed and enthusiastic consent

[Deleted Member]

Random point, but the date in the act doesn't tell you when it came into ***. Lots of laws pass into law (and therefore have dates) years before they come into ***. This is intentional to allow people time to learn about the change in law before it has any effect. Just in case anyone uses the date as a guide, given with how much certainty this was suggested in an earlier message.

[typhoon2]

The new criminal offence (section 70) came into effect yesterday and it does outlaw strangling. I'd post a direct link if I could.

[Cu****]

The Domestic *** Act 2021 includes making non-fatal strangulation a specific criminal offence, punishable by up to five years in prison. The act typically involves an ***r strangling or intentionally affecting their victim’s breathing in an attempt to control or intimidate them. This follows concerns that perpetrators were avoiding punishment, as the practice can often leave no visible ***, making it harder to prosecute under existing offences such as Actual Bodily Harm (ABH). I know a female who suffered this domestically.
No one knows if a sub will go to the police, after having talked with her friends about what she experienced, particularly if it frightened her. Courts are providing screens to protect the identity of victims, along with video links and reducing the opportunity for cross examining and taking letters from doctors and employers, as evidence of such occurences. This suggests that prosecution is going to be easier.

[ey****]

So, again

this is relating to domestic *** rather than consensual breath play.  If you feel that a sub you are doing consensual breath play with may report it as domestic *** then you do not have the required level of trust to play with the sub and should not be

if your only idea of breath play is strangulation then you have very poor grasp of breath play anyway

Honestly; this is not a big issue - just a reminder trust should be both ways

if you want to worry about laws, then the one you need to protest is the Online Harms Bill 

[Cu****]

Quote from legal side, a legal blog by law students for law students, relating to British backpacker Grace Millane who was ***ed in New Zealand by a sociopath and who used “consensual rough sex” in his defence.

”Campaign group ‘We Can’t Consent To This’ started as a response to Grace’s ***, and to the increasing numbers of women and girls killed and injured in *** that is claimed to be consensual. Their research shows that since 2016, the ‘rough sex defence’ was successful in 7 of the 17 killings of a woman which reached trial, where the defendant was either found not guilty or received a manslaughter conviction.

 

The Domestic *** Bill was first introduced in 2019 to “support all victims of domestic ***.” It includes provisions that banned the rough sex defence, as it rules out “consent for sexual gratification” as a defence for causing serious harm to a person.

 

During Grace’s trial as Kempson attempted to use this defence, her cousin Hannah O’Callaghan stated that it was “truly horrendous” to have to “listen to his lies” during the court case. She also stated that it made her feel as though “Grace was on trial, but unable to defend herself” which this defence allowed for in these cases. In response to the defence, her family stated that they were hopeful that “no other family has to go through” what they did with their daughter and that it would “stop men” from pleading this defence, “knowing it will get them a lesser sentence.”

Kempson was jailed for life, with a minimum non-parole period of 17 years.

So rough sex does come under Domestic *** Act. Google the case if you don’t believe me. We had this discussion nine months ago.

[ey****]

the way to avoid this being a problem is simply to not kill your partner during rough sex. 

[Cu****]

What a flippant, dismissive response from someone who is looked up to and considered to be an influencer within this community. “Honestly, this is not a big issue” Really? And your medical qualifications are? And your intensive care equipment comprises of? So it wouldn’t be a big issue if you, or one of your family, were directly affected by such an act?

Please read comments by Jay Wiseman on The Medical Realities of Breath Control Play. Perhaps anyone who reads his piece, will appreciate how dangerous such interventions are. And before you trot out, the line,“ Well there’s other dangerous scenes in bdsm”, is there anything more dangerous than taking someone’s life, and having to live with the guilt and ruinous aftermath?

 

[ey****]

I think we have the potential here of getting into "is type of play x safe" rather than the thread at hand

I don't mean to be dismissive there but it does have a potential to go way off topic and not be useful to anyone.

The legal aspect.   The problem as you stated is/was that there were people who had killed their partners and then claiming it was an accident in rough sex in order to lessen their sentence or to even find the charge dropped.  The New Zealand case which was a massive catalyst is you had a guy standing there going "she liked rough sex" while people in the room gobsmacked because they knew he had been abusive. And the one person who could clarify if it was consensual or not was dead.

I support the legislative clarification.

For those who practice consensual kink; this doesn't/hasn't changed anything.

However, of course, if your thought in play is "will this result in their serious *** or death" then you shouldn't do it.  If your thought is "will they run to the police and say I ***d her" then you lack the trust and shouldn't do it.

 

[Mi****]

The law doesn't outlaw enough sex play, but looks to close the excuse of they died during rough sex play.

Any serious bdsm couple should have a contract anyway which clearly states what's allowed in bedroom along with agreed upon safe words/indicators.

And if your chocking your partner, it's pressure on the side of neck, learn to *** properly.

[ey****]

7 hours ago, MidlandsMaster said:

Any serious bdsm couple should have a contract anyway which clearly states what's allowed in bedroom along with agreed upon safe words/indicators.

contracts can be fun - but are merely ceremonial.

they shouldn't be relied upon as defence in any court.