Caselaw

Question 1

R V Taisalika

Answer 1

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

Question 2

DPP V SMITH

Answer 2

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

Question 3

R V Hunt

Answer 3

Wounding, maiming or disfiguring need not be grievous if in causing that harm the defendant had the intent to cause really serious harm.

Question 4

R V Mwai

Answer 4

Causing GBH does not need to take effect instantly - the consequences may be delayed but they are consequences nonetheless.

Question 5

R V Waters

Answer 5

Breaking of the skin and the flowing of blood, either internally or externally

Question 6

R V Rapana and Murray

Answer 6

The word disfigures covers not only permanent damage but also temporary

Question 7

R v Donovan

Answer 7

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 no doubt be more than merely transitory or trifling.

Question 8

R V Chan-Fook

Answer 8

Actual bodily harm can include psychiatric injury if medical evidence confirms an identifiable clinical condition

Question 9

Cameron V R

Answer 9

Recklessness is established if
A) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that
- his actions would bring about a proscribed result
- that the proscribed circumstances existed and
B) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable

Question 10

R V Tipple

Answer 10

The general rule of recklessness is to be given the subjective meaning which requires that the accused had a conscious appreciation for the relevant risk

Question 11

R V Tihi

Answer 11

In addition to one of the specific intent 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 would likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it

Question 12

R V Wati

Answer 12

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 intended to avoid or facilitate

Question 13

R V Strum

Answer 13

The court in this matter held that to stupefy means to cause and effect on the mind or nervous system of a person, which really seriously interferes with that persons mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder and intended crime

Question 14

R V Crossan

Answer 14

It can be said that she was rendered incapable of resistance by violent means just as effectively as if she were physically incapable

Question 15

R V Pekepo

Answer 15

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

Question 16

R V Swain

Answer 16

To deliberately or purposefully remove a sawn off shotgun from a bag after being confronted or called upon by a police constable amounts to a use of that fire around within the meaning of section 198A CA61

Question 17

Simister and brookbanks

Answer 17

Knowing or correctly believing

Question 18

Fisher V R

Answer 18

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

Question 19

R V Manapouri

Answer 19

Two or more people can be charged in regards to a single firearm that each “had with him” if each had an appropriate degree of control over it

Question 20

Hayes V R

Answer 20

The objective facts of a particular case may be such that the jury can properly infer that the accused had a dishonest mind unless he or she can raise a reasonable doubt on the basis of a relevant but mistaken belief

Question 21

R V Skivington

Answer 21

Larceny (Theft) is an element of robbery and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to larceny, then it negatives one of the elements of the offence of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out.

Question 22

R V Lapier

Answer 22

Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken even if possession by the thief if only momentary

Question 23

R V Cox

Answer 23

Possession involves two elements
Physical - actual or potential physical custody or control
Mental - knowledge and intention
Knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused that the substance is in their possession, an intention to exercise possession

Question 24

R V Maihi

Answer 24

It is implicit in accompany that there must be a nexus (connection or link) between the act of stealing and a threat of violence.

Both must be present- however the term does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous

Question 25

Peneha v police

Answer 25

It is sufficient that the actions of the defendant forcibly interfere with the personal freedom or amount to forcible powerful or violent action or motion producing a very marked or powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort

Question 26

R V Broughton

Answer 26

The manifestation of an intention to inflict violence unless the money or property be handed over. The threat may be direct or veiled. It may be conveyed by words or conduct or a combination of both.

Question 27

R V Pacholko

Answer 27

The actual presence or absence of fear on the part of the complainant is not the yardstick. It is the conduct of the accused which has to be assessed rather then the strength of the nerves of the person threatened.

Question 28

R V wells

Answer 28

There is no requirement that the harm be inflicted on the victim of the robbery, thus infliction of harm to a person seeking to prevent the escape of the offender will come within this section

Question 29

R V Joyce

Answer 29

The crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred.

Question 30

R V Galey

Answer 30

Being together with involves two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force either in any event or as circumstances might require directly in the perpetration of the crime

Question 31

R V Bentham

Answer 31

“Anything” does not include the defendants unsevered hand

Question 32

R V Wellard

Answer 32

The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with the carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be.

Question 33

R V Crossan

Answer 33

Taking away and detaining are separate and distinct offences. The first consists of taking (the victim) away. The second is detaining her.

The first offence is complete when the prisoner took the woman away against her will. Then, having taken her away, he detained her against her will, and his conduct in detaining her constitutes a new and different offence.

Question 34

R V Cox - consent

Answer 34

Consent must be full, voluntary, free and informed, freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form a rational judgment.

Question 35

R V Pryce

Answer 35

Detaining is an active concept meaning to “keep in confinement or custody”.

This is to be contrasted to the passive concept of harbouring or mere failure to hand over

Question 36

Mohi

Answer 36

The offence is complete once there has been a period of detention or a taking accompanied by the necessary intent, regardless of whether that intent was carried out

Question 37

R V Waaka

Answer 37

Intent may be formed at any time during the taking away. If a taking away commences without the intent to have intercourse, but that intent is formed during the taking away, then that is sufficient for the purpose of the section

Question 38

R V M

Answer 38

The crown must prove that the accused intended to take away or detain the complainant and that he or she knew that the complainant was not consenting.