Case Law Serious Assaults

Question 1

R v Taisalika

Answer 1

The nature of the blow and gash which it produced on the complainants head would point strongly to the presence of necessary intent

Question 2

R v Rapana and Murray

Answer 2

Disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage

Question 3

DDP v Smith

Answer 3

Bodily harm needs no explanation and “grievous”means no more and no less than “really serious”

Question 4

R v Waters

Answer 4

A wound is the breaking of skin with the flow of blood and can be internal or external

Question 5

R v Donovan

Answer 5

Bodily harm includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim

It need not be permanent but must be more than transitory and trifling

Question 6

Cameron V R

Answer 6

Recklessness is established if:

a) The Defendant recognized there was a real possibility that:
i) his or her actions would bring about the proscribed circumstances
ii) the proscribed circumstances existed
b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable

Question 7

r v tihi

Answer 7

In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), “it must be shown that the offender either meant to cause the specified harm, or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it”.

Question 8

r v wati

Answer 8

There must be proof of the commission or attempted commission of a crime either by the person committing the assault or by the person whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate.

Question 9

r v pekepo

Answer 9

A reckless discharge of a firearm in the general direction of a passer-by who happens to be hit is not sufficient proof. An intention to shoot that person must be established.

Question 10

r v swain

Answer 10

To deliberately or purposely remove a sawn-off shotgun from a bag after being confronted by or called upon by a police constable amounts to a use of that firearm within the meaning of s 198A Crimes Act 1961.

Question 11

r v fisher

Answer 11

It is necessary in order to establish a charge under section 198A(2) for the Crown to prove that the accused knew someone was attempting to arrest or detain him because otherwise the element of mens rea of intending to resist lawful arrest or detention cannot be established.