Please read the following facts and consider the criminal liability, if any, of Neil and Kate under the Offences against the Person Act 1861, and the common law.

Neil, a medical student, has a serious shoe fetish, finding men's brown shoes a real turn on. One of the other students on his course, Thomas, bought a new pair of designer brown loafers and Neil was very attracted to them. Neil started following Thomas everywhere at university and taking photos of Thomas wearing the new shoes. Neil would often leave Thomas a present of brown shoe polish, a new pair of laces or a photo of Thomas's shoes in his student pigeon-hole. Consequently Thomas became ill through stress just before his exams and asked the doctor to sign him off university, which the doctor duly did stating that he was suffering from severe depression.

To relieve the frustrations created by Thomas's brown shoes Neil decided to visit his local sado-masochist mistress, Kate, and ask her to walk up and down his naked back whilst wearing red patent stiletto boots. Kate granted his request and did so whilst also whipping him all over with a whip. The whipping left large welts on Neil's back, and the stiletto heels caused a number of deep puncture marks to his skin.

Neil then had consensual sexual intercourse with Kate without using any protection despite the fact that he thought he might have contracted HIV from an earlier mistress. Kate mistakenly thought that Neil was the client who had shown her his HIV clear medical certificate earlier that week and so did not insist that he wore a condom. Three months later Kate was diagnosed as having contracted HIV.

Consider the criminal liability, if any, ofNeilandKateunder the Offences against the Person Act 1861, and the common law.