non-fatal offences- GBH Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

what are the 2 types of GBH

A

wounding and inflicting GBH
wounding and inflicting GBH with intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

wounding and inflicting GBH section

A

s20 offences against the person act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

wounding and inflicting GBH with intent section

A

s18 offences against the person act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

actus reus of wounding and inflicting GBH

A

wounding
inflicting
grievous bodily harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

mens rea of wounding and inflicting GBH

A

intention to cause someone harm
or
subjective recklessness to cause someone harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

wounding definition

A

‘anything that cuts or breaks the continuality of the skin’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

case laws that define wounding

A

Moriarty v Brookes 1834
R v Wood 1830
JCC v Eisenhower 1983

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Moriarty v Brookes 1834

A

A small cut below the eye IS a wound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

R v Wood 1830

A

A broken collarbone which does not break
the skin IS NOT a wound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

JCC v Eisenhower 1983

A

Internal bleeding in the eye caused by
firing a pellet gun IS NOT a wound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

inflicting

A

usual rules of causation
factual cause (r v white)
legal cause (r v kimsey)
chain of causation (thin skull rule)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

grevious bodily harm cases to define

A

DPP v Smith
R v Saunders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

DPP v Smith - w/ intent

A

'’really serious harm’’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R v Saunders

A

'’serious harm’’ that doesn’t need to be life threatening

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

what else should be considered

A

age and vulnerability of victim
numerous lesser injuries done together
passing a disease
psychiatric harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

age and vulnerability of victim case

A

R v Bollom (bruising a baby)

17
Q

numerous lesser injuries done together
case

A

R v Brown and Stratton

18
Q

passing a disease

A

R v Dica (HIV)

19
Q

psychiatric harm

A

R v Burstow (harrassment causing depression)

20
Q

mens rea- ‘maliciously’ meaning

A

intention to cause some harm or subjective recklessness to cause some harm

21
Q

cases to prove mens rea

A

R v Savage
R v Cunningham

22
Q

R v Savage

A

confirmed ‘maliciously’ meant ‘intention’ or ‘recklessness’

23
Q

R v Cunningham

A

confirmed the test for recklessness is subjective (some harm)

24
Q

wounding and inflicting gbh with intent sentence

A

max sentence is life
only can be seen in the crown court

25
Q

actus reus of s18 offences against the person act

A

wounding
or
inflicting
grievous bodily harm

26
Q

mens rea

A

intention to cause really serious harm
or
resist

27
Q

case law for mens rea of s18

A

R v Taylor 2009
R v Nedrick and Woollin

28
Q

R v Taylor

A

An intention to wound is not enough by itself. There must be an intention to cause really serious harm.

29
Q

R v Nedrick and Woollin

A

Oblique intention is
only available if the defendant foresaw really serious harm as a virtually certain consequence.

30
Q

intention to resist arrest case

A

R v Morrison

31
Q

wounding and inflicting GBH sentence and court

A

6 months or £5000 fine
crown or magistrates