The Maliciousness of Rape
Abstract
The High Court of Australia’s judgment in Mraz v The Queen (No 1)1 was the first time the court
offered a legal opinion on rape. But those opinions have long been forgotten as the case instead
became precedential for its decisions on miscarriages of justice in Mraz (No 1) and estoppel in Mraz
v The Queen (No 2).2 These precedents, favourable to the accused, meant no justice for the deceased
woman. The legal use of Mraz has obscured the original issue underlying the appeals at the time: what
was the “maliciousness” of rape and what “injury” did it cause?
Journal Title
Criminal Law Journal
Volume
40
Copyright Statement
This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited.
Subject
Criminal Law and Procedure
Australian History (excl. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander History)