To ask if recording someone in a private act without consent is an offence

[TatianaLarina]

... whether or not the intent was for sexual gratification or not?

As per the voyeurism laws in the Sex Offences Act. I was looking at it and it's not clear to a layperson.

Section 67 states:

(3) A person commits an offence if–

(a) he records another person (B) doing a private act

(b) he does so with the intention that he or a third person will, for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, look at an image of B doing the act, and

(c) he knows that B does not consent to his recording the act with that intention.

Is (a) an offence in itself, or does it have to include (b) and (c) to be one?

It has to include all points to prove so b and c as well.

So how do you prove someone's motive in making a recording?

Many people don't know for sure why they've been filmed.

Would you have to prove the motive was sexual in court? And how would you go about that?

You infer it from the available evidence; everything from the general circumstances to what they said, texted etc.

Sometimes it speaks for itself.

Private act so toilet and sleeping?

I wonder if B and C are to prevent any confusion over CCTV, etc?
I would assume that most criminal cases B would be inferred automatically.

So reread what you typed.

So what if they claimed that they filmed the footage to protect themselves from accusations of rape?

Is there are circumstance in which filming someone having sex without consent is not illegal? Not necessarily the above, but ever.

Or is it automatically voyeurism because it's a sex act in itself, rather than say someone having shower - less directly sexual.

"Is there are circumstance in which filming someone having sex without consent is not illegal? Not necessarily the above, but ever."
I'd assume if it was in a public place, e.g. If a couple were at it in a fast food shop and it was caught by CCTV, they would be up for gross indecency but anyone else filming it probably would t get into trouble?

I don't mean in public, I mean in private.

I would expect the court would give that about as much credit as they do people who claim they were only carrying an offensive weapon "for protection".

Filming someone someone without their consent during sex in order to prove consent?

I would imagine so but it raises the point of whether a voyeurism charge has to rests on whether filmed sex without consent is voyerusim whatever the motive, or went it has to be specifically for gratification.

You would need to show the motive to get a conviction, I suspect. Just as for a murder charge to stick, you need to show deliberate intention to kill the victim.

So are you thinking of the following situation (or similar):

A couple meet up to have sex - they haven't met before. Sex is consensual but the man worries in case she later says it was rape, so he records the act in advance. He has no intention of watching it again or giving it to someone else; it's just there for him in case she claims it was rape. Is that the sort of thing you're thinking of?

Exactly.

And I want to know whether a man filming himself having sex without the consent of the partner is ever actually legal, of if it's always an offence regardless of the motive (or claimed motive).

It seems to me quite important for people to know generally whether filmed sex without consent is always illegal whatever the motive, or whether sometimes legal.

Your not going to get the answer you want because it's all situation dependent. You've already given an example of a possible defence.

You're. Not Your!

Filming isn’t always an offence to my knowledge. Making it public without your permission, however, is.

You've answered your own question. Its sometimes legal.

it's

This sounds like the sort of question they ask in law exams.

The judge's direction to the jury would be that if they believe, on the balance of probabilities, that he only filmed the act for that purpose, and that he did not intend that he or anybody else would ever watch the footage for sexual gratification, he is not guilty.

It's very much the posters on the thread who've answered my question not me, as until this thread I was under the impression that filming sex without consent was in itself an offence.

I think it's a good question.
How many women in here have been filmed or taken in photos by their partner wo their knowledge/consent?
To just discover that later on by chance (lost of photos on the computer and/or mobile phone).
All these women felt invaded.
So yes it's a good question as to whthere it's illegal or not.

Exactly. I'm quite surprised that it's not automatically illegal and you apparently would have to prove it was for sexual gratification.

Because it's an invasion irrespective of what use it was put to. And the use would be difficult to prove.

And there's so much of it about.