Liabilities

Question 1

Wounding With Intent To Cause GBH.
Sec 188(1), CA 1961.
14 years IMP.

Answer 1

1. With Intent to Cause GBH.
2. To Anyone.
3. Wounds OR Maims OR Disfigures OR Causes GBH.
4. To Any Person.

1.1.
Intent: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v Taisalika: 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.

GBH can be defined simply as “harm that is really serious”

DPP v Smith: Bodily harm needs no explanation and “grevious” means no more and no less than “really serious.”

2.1 and 4.1.
Gender neutral. Proved by judicial notice or circumstantially.

3.1
R v Waters = Wounds: A breaking of the skin evidenced by a flow of blood more often than not be external. But may be internal.
OR
Maims: Will involve mutilating, crippling or disabling part of the body, depriving of the use of a limb or one of the senses. Need not be permanent.
OR
Disfigures: To “disfigure” means to deform or deface, to mar or alter the figure or appearance of a person.

R v Rapana and Murray: The word disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage.
OR
GBH: GBH can be defined simply as “harm that is really serious”.

DPP v Smith: “Bodily harm” needs no explanation and grievous menas no more and no less than really serious.

Question 2

Wounding With Intent.Sec 188(2) CA 1961.7 years IMP.

1st exam = with reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Answer 2

1. With intent to Injure anyone OR With reckless disregard for the safety of others.
2. Wounds OR Maims OR Disfigures OR Causes GBH.
3. To any person.

1.1.
Intent: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v Taisalika: 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.

Injure-Sec2, CA61: Means to Cause actual bodily harm.

R v Donovan: 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 and trifling.
OR
With reckless Disregard for the safety of others:
Acting recklessly involves consciously and deliberately taking an unjustifiable risk.

R v Harney: Recklessness means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In NZ it involves proof that the consequences complained of could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.

1.1 and 3.1.
Gender neutral. Proved by judicial notice or circumstantially.

3.1
R v Waters = Wounds: A breaking of the skin evidenced by a flow of blood more often than not be external. But may be internal.
OR
Maims: Will involve mutilating, crippling or disabling part of the body, depriving of the use of a limb or one of the senses. Need not be permanent.
OR
Disfigures: To “disfigure” means to deform or deface, to mar or alter the figure or appearance of a person.

R v Rapana and Murray: The word disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage.
OR
GBH: GBH can be defined simply as “harm that is really serious”.

DPP v Smith: “Bodily harm” needs no explanation and grievous menas no more and no less than really serious.

Question 3

Injuring With Intent To Cause GBH.
Sec 189(1) CA 1961.
10 years IMP.

Answer 3

1. With intent to cause GBH.
2. To Anyone.
3. Injures.
4. Any person.

1.1.
Intent: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v Taisalika: 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.

GBH can be defined simply as “harm that is really serious”

DPP v Smith: Bodily harm needs no explanation and “grevious” means no more and no less than “really serious.”

2.2 and 4.4
Gender neutral. Proved by judicial notice or circumstantially.

3.3.
Injure-Sec2, CA61: Means to Cause actual bodily harm.

R v Donovan: 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 and trifling.

Question 4

Injuring With Intent.Sec 189(2) CA61. 5 years IMP

Answer 4

1. 1 With intent to Injure Anyone OR With reckless disregard for the safety of others.
2. 2 Injures
3. 3 Any person.

1.1.
Intent: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v Taisalika: 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.

Injure-Sec2, CA61: Means to Cause actual bodily harm.

R v Donovan: 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 and trifling.
OR
With reckless Disregard for the safety of others:
Acting recklessly involves consciously and deliberately taking an unjustifiable risk.

R v Harney: Recklessness means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In NZ it involves proof that the consequences complained of could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.

2.2.
(Refer 1.1 for Injure def)

Injure-Sec2, CA61: Means to Cause actual bodily harm.

R v Donovan: 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 and trifling.

3.3.
Gender Neutral. Proved by judicial notice or circumstantially.

Question 5

Aggravated Wounding OR Injury
Sec 191(1)(a) or (b) or (c), CA 1961.
14 years IMP.
OR 
Sec191(2)(a) or (b) or (c) 
7 yrs IMP

Answer 5

1. With intent
   (a) To commit or facilitate the commission of any crime
   OR
   (b) To avoid the detection of himself or any other person in the commission of any crime
   OR
   (c) To avoid the arrest or Facilitate the flight of himself or any other person upon the commission or attempted commission of any crime.
2. Wounds OR Maims OR disfigures OR causes GBH OR Stupefies OR Renders unconscious OR by any violent means renders incapable of resistance,
3. Any person.

1.1.
Intent to Commit: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v Taisalika: 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.

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

Sub Sec (a): To make possible or to make easy or easier.
R v Sturm: Under Sec191(1)(a) it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed.
OR
Sub Sec (b): Offences under Sec191(1)(b) arise during the commission of an imprisonable offence, where the offender causes the specified harm to prevent himself or another person from being “caught in the act”.
OR
Sub Sec (c): To make possible or to make easy or easier. The specified harm is caused to enable the offender(s) to more easily effect their escape, or to prevent their capture after the commission or attempted commission of an imprisonable offence.

Imprisonable offence: Sec 5 Criminal Procedure Act 2011: Imprisonable offence means, in the case of an individual an offence punishable by imprisonment for life or by a term of imprisonment.

R v Wati: 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.

2.2
Wound=R v Waters. A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of the skin will be normally evidenced bt a flow of blood and, in its occurrence at the site of a blow or impact, the wound will more often than not be external. But there are those cases where the bleeding which evidences the separation of tissues may be internal.
OR
Maims=Will involves mutilation, crippling or disabling a part of the body so as to deprive the victim of the use of a limb or of one of the senses. There needs to be some degree of permanence.
OR
Disfigures=To disfigure means to deform or deface, to mar or alter the figure or appearance of a person.
R v Rapana and Murray=The word ‘disfigure’ covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage.
OR
Causes GBH=GBH can be defined simply as harm that is really serious.
DPP v Smith=Bodily harm needs no explanation and grievous means no more and no less than really serious.
OR
Stupefies=R v Sturm. To stupify means to cause an 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 an intended crime.
OR
Renders unconscious=To render a person unconscious, the offenders actions must cause the victim to lose consciousness.
OR
Any violent means=Includes the application of force that physically incapacitates a person.
R v Crossan=Incapable of resistance includes a powerlessness of the will as well as a physical incapacity.

3.1 Gender neutral. Proven by judicial notice or by circumstantial evidence.

Sec191(2)
OR
Injury Sec2 CA61 = Means to cause actual bodily harm.
R V Donovan = Includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim. Need not be permanent but must no doubt be more than merely transitory or trifling.

Question 6

Discharges a Firearm or Doing a dangerous act with Intent to do GBH.
Sec 198(1)(a) or (b) or (c), CA 1961
14 years IMP.

Answer 6

1.1 With intent to do GBH.
(a)
1.2 Discharges any Firearm OR Air gun OR Similar weapon.
1.3 At any person.
OR
(b) Sends or delivers to any person, or puts in any place, any explosive or injurious substances or device
OR
(c) Sets fire to any property.

Question 7

Discharges a firearm with intent to Injure.
Sec 198(2)(a), CA1961
7 years IMP.

Answer 7

1. 1 With intent to do GBH
2. 2 Discharges any Firearm OR Air gun OR Similar weapon,
3. 3 At any person.

Question 8

Uses any firearm against Law Enforcement Officer etc
Sec 198A(1), CA1961
14 years IMP
OR
Sec198A(2)
10yrs IMP
Intent to resist lawful arrest or detention of himself/herself/any other person.

Answer 8

1. Uses any firearm in any manner whatsoever/
2. Against any constable etc, acting in the course of his or her duty.
3. Knowing that or being reckless whether or not that person is a member of the police etc acting so.

Use in any manner whatsoever = Use meaning to fire it but in any manner whatsoever widens definition to a range of acts. Sufficient to be handling or manipulating firearm conveying implied threat. Not necessary to present or discharge.

1.1 Police v Parker = “Use in any manner whatever” is to contemplate a situation short of actually firing the weapon and to present a rifle too. Is equivalent tkk or means the same thing…

R v Swain = To deliberately or purposely remove a swan-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 S198A CA61

1. 2 Firearm Sec2 Arms Act83 = (a) Means anything from which any shot, bullet, missile, or other projectile van be discharged by force of explosive and
   (b) Includes- (i) Anything that has been adapted and
   (ii) Anything that is not for the time being capable but which, by completion or the replacement of any component or repair of any defect, would be a firearm and
   (iii) Anything dismantled or partially dismantled and
   (iv) Any specially dangerous airgun.

Constable
2.1 Sec4 Police Act2008 - Constable means a police employee who (a) holds the office of constable (whether appointed as a constable under the Police Act 1958 or this Act) and (b) includes a constable who holds any level of position within the NZ Police

2.2 The term includes every lawful act which a constable does while on duty and any professional obligation while off duty.

Knowing
3.1 The accused must know the victim is a police officer and know that the officer is acting in the course of his or her duty or be reckless as to those facts.

3.2 Simester and Brookbanks- knowing means knowing or correctly believing. The defendant my believe something wrongly, but cannot know something that is false.
OR
Reckless.
R v Harney

Question 9

Commission of an imprisonable offence with a firearm.
Sec 198B(1)(a) or (b), CA1961
10 years IMP

Answer 9

(a)
1.1 In committing any imprisonable offence.
1.2 Uses any Firearm.
(b)
1.1 While committing any imprisonable offence.
1.2 Has any firearm with him or her.
1.3 IN circumstances that prima facie show an intention to use it in connection with that imprisonable offence.

Question 10

Abduction
Sec208(a) OR (b) OR (c), CA1961
14 years IMP

1st exam = (c) cause her to to be married.

Answer 10

1. unlawfully
2. Takes away OR detains
3. A person
4. Without his or her consent OR with his or her consent obtained by fraud OR with his or her consent obtained by durss
5. With intent to
   (a) Marry him/her OR
   (b) Have sexual connection with him/her OR
   (c) Cause him/her to be married or have sexual connection with some other person.
6. 1 Without lawful justification authority or excuse. (apparent from circumstances offenders actions unlawful).
7. 1 Rv Crossan = Taking away and detaining are “separate and distinct offences. The 1st consists of taking (the victim) away, the 2nd of detaining them.

2.2Take away - R v Wellard = The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away form the place where the victim wants to be.
OR
Detains - R v Pryce = 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.

3. 1 Person = Proven by judicial notice or circumstantial evidence.
4. 1 R v Cox = Consent must be full, voluntary, free and informed…freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form a rational judgement.

4.2 To obtain consent by fraud = Consent obtained by the misrepresentation of the facts or the offenders intentions.
OR
To obtain consent by Duress = Consent obtained by actual or implied threat or force to the victim or another person. Can include other forms of pressure or coercion.

5. 1 Intent = Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.
6. 2 R v Mohan = A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.
7. 3 R v Waaka = A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient, there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.
8. 4 R v Mohi = The offence is committed at the time of taking away, so long as there is, at that moment, the necessary intent. It has never been regarded as necessary…that the crown should have to show the intent was carried out.

(a) Marry = In this context the term to marry means to engage in a marriage solemnised in accordance with the provisions of the Marrage Act 1955.
OR
(b) Sexual Connection - Sec2 CA61
(a) Connection effected by the introduction into the genitival or anus of one person, otherwise than for genuine medical purpose of -
(i) a part of the body of another person or
(ii) an object held or manipulated by another person
(b)Connection between the mouth or tongue of one person and a part of another persons genitalia or anus or
(c) the continuation of connection of a kind described in paragraph (a) or (b).
OR
(C) This relates to situations where the abductor takes away or detains a victim to enable another perosn to marry them.
OR
Under this provision the offenders intent is to enable another person to have sexual connection with the victim.

Question 11

Kidnapping
Sec 209(a) OR (b) OR (c), CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 11

1. unlawfully
2. Takes away OR detains
3. A person
4. Without his or her consent OR with his or her consent obtained by fraud OR with his or her consent obtained by duress
5. With intent to
   (a) hold him/her for ransom or service OR
   (b) Cause him/her to be confined or imprisoned OR
   (c) Cause him/her to be sent or taken out of New Zealand
6. 1 Without lawful justification authority or excuse. (apparent from circumstances offenders actions unlawful).
7. 1 R v Crossan = Taking away and detaining are “separate and distinct offences. The 1st consists of taking (the victim) away, the 2nd of detaining them.

2.2 Take away - R v Wellard = The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away form the place where the victim wants to be.
OR
Detains - R v Pryce = 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.

2. 3 R v M = The crown must prove that the accused intended to take away or detain the complainant and that he or she knew the complainant was not consenting.
3. 1 Person = Proven by judicial notice or circumstantial evidence.

4.1 To obtain consent by fraud = Consent obtained by the misrepresentation of the facts or the offenders intentions.
OR
To obtain consent by Duress = Consent obtained by actual or implied threat or force to the victim or another person. Can include other forms of pressure or coercion.

(A child under the age of 16yrs cannot consent to being taken away or detained. S209, CA61)

5. 1 Intent = Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.
6. 2 R v Mohan = A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.
7. 3 R v Waaka = A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient, there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.
8. 4 R v Mohi = The offence is committed at the time of taking away, so ong as there is, at that moment, the necessary intent. It has never been regarded as necessary…that the crown should have to show the intent was carried out.

(a) Ransom = A sum of money demanded or paid for the release of a person
OR
Service = Hold as a servant or slave.

(b) Confined = Restricting their movements to within a geographical area.
OR
Imprisoned = To be held as if in prison.

(c) Sent out of NZ = Sent - normal meaning, to be sent outside NZ shores.
OR
Taken out of NZ = Taken suggests victim in company or custody of a person accompanying them out of NZ.

Question 12

Aggravated Robbery (GBH)
Sec235(a) CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 12

1. 1 Robs
2. 2 Any person
3. 3 At the time of OR Immediately before OR Immediately after
4. 4 Causes GBH
5. 5 To any person.

Question 13

Aggravated Robbery (2 or More people)
Sec235(b) CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 13

1. 1 Being together with any other person/s
2. 2 Robs
3. 3 Any person

Question 14

Aggravated Robbery (Weapon)
Sec235(c) CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 14

1. 1 Being armed with any offensive weapon OR instrument OR any thing appearing to be such an offensive weapon or instrument
2. 2 Robs
3. 3 Any person.

Question 15

Assault with intent to Rob (GBH)
Sec236(1)(a) CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 15

1. With Intent to Rob any person
2. Causes GBH
3. To that person or any other person.

Question 16

Assault with intent to Rob (Weapon)
sec236(1)(b) CA1961
14 years IMP

1st exam

Answer 16

1. With intent to Rob any person
2. Being armed with any offensive weapon
3. Assaults that person or any other person

1.1 Intent: Means to do it, they desire a specific result and act with the aim or purpose of achieving it.

R v Mohan: A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v Waaka: A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

1. 2 Rob = Theft (Sec219 CA61), Accompanied by violence OR Accompanied by threats of violence, To any person OR Property. Used to extort the property stolen OR Used to prevent or overcome resistance to it being stolen.
2. 3 Person = gender neutral. proven by judicial notice or circumstantially.
3. 1 Being armed with = The term being armed with means that the defendant is carrying the item or has it available for immediate use as a weapon.
4. 2 Offensive weapon - sec 202A CA61 = Any article made or altered for use for causing bodily injury, or intended by the person having it with him for such use.
5. 1 Assault Sec2 CA61 = Act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to the person of another, directly or indirectly or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to the person of another, if the person making the threat has, or causes the other to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she has, present ability to effect hie or her purpose and to assault has a corresponding meaning.
6. 2 Person = gender neutral. proven by judicial notice or circumstantially.

Question 17

Assault with intent to Rob (together with)
sec236(1)(c) CA1961
14 years IMP

Answer 17

1. With intent to Rob any person
2. Being together with any other person/s
3. Assaults that person or any other person

Question 18

Robbery
Sec 234 (1) CA61
Penalty 10 yrs

Answer 18

1. Theft
2. Accompanied by violence OR Accompanied by threats of violence
3. To any person OR Property
4. Used to extort the property stolen OR Used to prevent or overcome resistance to it being stolen.
5. 1 Theft Sec 219(1) CA61 = Dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property.
6. 2 R v Skivington = Larceny / theft is an ingredients of robbery and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to robbery, then it negatives one of the elements of the offence of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out.
7. 3 R v Lapier = Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the theft is only momentarily.
8. 4 R v Cox = Possession involves 2 elements. 1st the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. 2nd the mental element, combination of knowledge and intention. Knowledge in sense of awareness by accused that substance in his possession and intention to exercise possession.

1.5 Possession may be actual or potential.
Actual Possession=Arises where the thing in question is in a persons physical custody, it is on or about their person, or immediately at hand.

1. 6 Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner = Ideal Possession (actual) = the term possession must be given a sensible and reasonable meaning in its context. Ideally a possessor of a thing has:
   - Complete physical control over it.
   - Knowledge of its existence, it’s situation and it’s qualities.

OR
Potential Possession=Arises when the person has the potential to have the thing in question in their control.

2. 1 R v Maihi = 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.
3. 2 Violence = in the contents of robbery, violence must involve more than a minimal degree of force and more than a technical assault but need not involve the infliction of bodily injury.

2.3 Peneha v Police = It is sufficient that the actions of the defendant forcibly interfere with 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.
OR
Threats of violence
R V Broughton = A threat of violence is 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.

3.1 To any person = Gender neutral proven by judicial notice or circumstantially.
Violence or threats can be directed at any person not just the victim and any property or interest.
OR
Property Sec2 CA61 =Includes any real or personal property and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, money, electricity and any debt and any thing in action any any other right or interest.

4.1 Extort = To extort means to obtain by violence, coercion or intimidation or to extract forcibly.
Extortion implies an overbearing of the will of the victim and the prosecution must show that the threats induced the victim to part with his property.

Property....
OR
Prevent = to keep from happening.
OR
Overcome resistance = to defeat to prevail over to get the better of in a conflict.

Question 19

Demanding with intent to steal. Etc
Sec 239(1) or (2) CA61
14 yrs IMP
OR
Sec 239(2) CA61
7 yrs IMP

Answer 19

1.1 Without claim of right.
1.2. By force or with any threat.
1.3. Compels any person to execute, make, accept, endorse, alter or destroy any document capable of conferring a pecuniary advantage. Capt EMAEAoDaDcoCaPA.
1.4. With intent to obtain any benefit.
OR
2.1 With menaces or by any threat.
2.2 Demands any property from any persons with intent to steal it.

Question 20

Blackmail
Sec 237 CA61
14 yrs IMP

Answer 20

1. Everyone commits Blackmail who -
   threatens, expressly or by implication to make any accusation against any person (living or dead)
   or
   To disclose something about any person (living or dead)
   or
   To cause serious damage to property or endanger the safety of any person with intent -
   (a) to cause the person to whom the threat is made to act in accordance with the will of the person making the threat and
   (b) to obtain any benefit or to cause any loss to any other person.