The line between injuries to the infliction of which an individual could consent and injuries to whose infliction he could not consent must be drawn it was argued where the public interest r

3. “The line between injuries to the infliction of which an individual could consent and injuries to whose infliction he could not consent must be drawn it was argued where the public interest required. Thus except in the case of regulated sports the public interest required that injuries should not be inflicted in public where they might give rise to a breach of the peace.” (Per Lord Jauncey R v Brown [1993] UKHL 19 para 11). In the light of this statement, critically assess the extent to which cases on consent as a defence to non-fatal offences against the person are consistent and coherent.