Evaluation Of Non-Fatal Offences Flashcards
Explain why non-fatal offences being out of date, is a reason for why the law needs to be updated.
• OAPA 1861 - 150 years old.
• Rejects MH problems we have today as ‘bodily harm’ - not mental health.
• R v Chan Fook, R v Burstow: said injury to MH also ‘bodily’
• R v Dica: inflicting a disease = GBH
Explain why non-fatal offences being inconsistent, is a reason for why the law needs to be updated.
• S.47 has max sentence of 5 years, whereas assault / battery have max sentence of 6 months.
• S.20: different levels / seriousness of a wound.
• R v Smith: cutting hair
• JCC v Eisenhower: deep cut.
State + explain the proposals for change put forward by the Law Commission Draft Bill in 2015.
• OAPA 1861 should be a ‘comprehensive modern statute’
• S.20 should be 7 years not 5.
• Offence ingredients set out explicitly + with easily understandable language.
• Add different assault levels (e.g. aggravated, threatened, e.t.c.)
• S.20 + S.18 names should change.
• Any new statute should provide a clear hierarchy of offences from the most serious to least. Place in hierarchy should reflect: harm caused, capability of D, max penalty should be in proportion.
