Malicious Wounding and GBH

Question 1

Is Malicious Wounding and Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) under S. 20 OAPA 1861 two separate offences?

Answer 1

Yes.

Question 2

What section are these two under and act?

Answer 2

S.20 OAPA 1861.

Question 3

What is their joint vague definition?

Answer 3

“Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously wound or inflict any grievous bodily harm upon any other person, either with or without any weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable… to imprisonment for not more than 5 years”

Question 4

For malicious wounding what counts as a wound? Does a internal skin cut count?

Answer 4

A wound is defined as ‘a cut or break in the continuity of the whole skin.’
A cut of internal skin, e.g. cheek, is sufficient

Question 5

Does internal bleeding count and what case supports it? Could it be GBH?

Answer 5

Internal bleeding, with no break in the outer skin, cannot be a wound.
Could be GBH
JJC v Eisenhower [1983]

Question 6

Does a broken bone count for malicious wounding and what is the exception, give a case?

Answer 6

A broken bone is not classed as a wound for the purpose of the Act.
A broken bone can only constitute as a wound if the fracture is compound:
Bone breaks through the surface of the skin.
R v Wood [1830]

Question 7

If there is no wound what can they still be liable for?

Answer 7

If there is no wound the defendant may still be liable under S. 20 OAPA 1861 through GBH.

Question 8

What accounts for Grievous Bodily Harm?

Answer 8

Grievous bodily harm means serious harm, which may be physical, psychological or by deliberate infection with a serious disease.

Question 9

What case states that GBH was really serious harm that does not have to be life threatening?

Answer 9

DPP v Smith [1961]

Question 10

What cases states that it was permissible to direct a jury that there only needs to be serious harm not really serious harm? (How helpful).

Answer 10

R v Saunders [1985]

Question 11

Courts can take different factors into account when assessing the extent of the GBH, what factors?

Answer 11

Different characteristics of the victim, e.g. age.

Question 12

When can it occur through a psychiatric injury? (2 and add the case for the second point).

Answer 12

When it is severe It must be a recognised psychological condition – R v Burstow.

Question 13

Can GBH be inflicted when the defendant deliberately inflicts an infectious disease? Give a case to back up your answer.

Answer 13

Yes.

R v Dica [2004]

Question 14

What is ‘inflict’ interpreted to mean?

Answer 14

Cause.

Question 15

Give a case that shows the defendant being the cause?

Answer 15

R v Lewis [1970]

Question 16

What case shows the causal link between the actions of the defendant and the wound or GBH suffered by the victim?

Answer 16

R v Burstow

Question 17

What is does R v Cunningham [1957] say about the mens rea of s.20 offences?

Answer 17

Intention to do some harm
Recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not (has the defendant foresaw that this kind of harm might be done, then takes the risk.

Question 18

Is there any need for the defendant to foresee the level of serious injury imposed only some harm? Give answer and case to back it up.

Answer 18

No. R v Parmenter [1991]

Question 19

What is the most serious non fatal offence and what section is it under?

Answer 19

Malicious Wounding and GBH S. 18 OAPA 1861.

Question 20

What is the definition of a S.18 offence?

Answer 20

“Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously by any means whatsoever wound or cause any grievous bodily harm to any person, with intent, to do some grievous bodily harm to any person, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person, shall be guilty of an offence”

Question 21

Does S.18 require specific intent?

Answer 21

Yes.

Question 22

What is the actus reus of a S.18?

Answer 22

The actus reus is the same as S. 20 – requires malicious wounding or GBH.

Question 23

S.18 is a specific intent offence which means?

Answer 23

Meaning the defendant has to prove intention.

Question 24

For S.18 what does the defendant have to intend to do?

Answer 24

Do some grievous bodily harm; or

Resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person.

Question 25

What rules of intent apply?

Answer 25

The normal rules of intention.

Question 26

Is the intention to maliciously wound alone enough for the mens rea of S.18? Give a case to support your answer.

Answer 26

No. R v Taylor [2009] (on appeal- judge misdirected the jury).

Question 27

Where the defendant is trying to resist arrest or prevent arrest or detention then the level of intention regarding the injury is…

Answer 27

lower.

Question 28

What must the prosecution show for resisting arrest?

Answer 28

Prosecution must show the defendant intended to resist arrest or prevent an arrest. Then only need to prove that the defendant was reckless as to whether their actions would cause a wound or an injury.

Question 29

Give a case that shows what the prosecution must prove for resisting arrest.

Answer 29

R v Morrison [1989]