Serious Assaults Flashcards
R v Tihi
In addition to one of the intents in 191 a-c it must be shown that the offender meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it
R v Sturm
Under section 191 (1) (a) it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed.
Wounding with intent (1)
- With intent to cause GBH
- to any person
- wounds or maims or disfigures or causes GBH
- to any person
Injuring with intent (1)
- With intent to cause GBH
- To any person
-injures - any person
Injures with intent (2)
- With intent to injure any person or reckless disregard for the safety of others
- injures
- any person
Wounds with intent (2)
- with intent to injure any person or reckless disregard for the safety of others
- wounds or maims or disfigures or causes GBH
- to any person
Aggravated wounding
With intent:
(a) commit or facilitate the commission of any imprisonable offence or
(b) to avoid detection of himself or any other person in the commission of any imprisonable offence or
(c) to avoid arrest or facilitate the flight of himself or any other person upon the commission or attempted commission of any imprisonable offence
- wounds of maims or disfigures or causes GBH or stupefies or renders unconscious any person or by any violent means renders any person incapable of resistance
Define intent
A deliberate act (or omission) to obtain/produce/get a specific result.
Not defined in CA1961
R v Taisalika
Nature of the blow and gash produced point strongly to the necessary intent
R v Donovan (McArthur)
Bodily harm includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with health or comfort of the victim. Doesn’t need to be permanent but must be more than transitory or trifling
R v Rapana & Murray
Disfigures covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage
R v Waters
A wound is a ‘breaking of the skin’ evidenced by the flow of blood. May be internal or external
DPP v Smith
Bodily harm needs no explanation and ‘grevious’ means no more and no less than ‘really serious’
R v Tipple
Reckless requires that the offender know of, or have a conscious appreciation of the relevant risk and it may be said that it requires “a deliberate decision to run the risk”
Cameron v R
Reckless is established if
(a) defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that
(i) his or her actions would bring about a proscribed result
(ii) that the proscribed circumstances existed AND
(b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable
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
R v Crossan
Incapable of resistance includes a powerlessness of the will as well as physical incapability
Explain doctorate of transferred malice
It is not necessary that the person suffering the harm was the intended victim. Mistaken identity or harm intended for one person is accidentally inflicted on another, he is still criminally liable.
Explain maims and disfigures
Maim - deprive another of the use of such members as may render him less able. Practically involves mutilation, crippling or disabling to deprive victim of use of that limb or senses. Generally needs to be a degree of permanence
Disfigures - to deform or deface. Mad or alter the figure or appearance of a person. As per R v Rapana and Murray, does not need to be permanent.
What is stupifies
To induce a state of stuper, make stupid, groggy or insensible, dull senses etc
Can be by variety of means.
R v Sturm relates to it seriously affecting persons mental or physical ability to stop the intended crime.
Explain by any violent means…
Application of force that physically incapacitates a person. May include threats of violence dependant on circumstances (surrounding actions, weapons etc). Related to R v Crossan where threats were used with a gun. Seemed as plausible as actually physical incapacitation
