Serious Assaults - case law

Question 1

Intent

Answer 1

R v Taisalika 25/6/93

The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.

Question 2

Recklessness

Answer 2

Cameron v R [2017]
Recklessness is established if:
(a) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
(i) his or her actions would bring about the proscribed result; and/or
(ii) that the proscribed circumstances existed; and
(b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable.

R v Tipple 22/12/05
Recklessness 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”.

Question 3

Bodily harm

Answer 3

R v McArthur [1975]
“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 be more than transitory and trifling.

Question 4

Grievous bodily harm

Answer 4

DPP v Smith (1961)

‘Bodily harm’ needs no explanation and ‘grievous’ means no more and no less than ‘really serious’.

Question 5

Wounds

Answer 5

R v Waters (1979)

A wound is a ‘breaking of the skin evidenced by the flow of blood. May be internal or external.

Question 6

Disfigures

Answer 6

R v Rapana and Murray (1988)

Disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage.

Question 7

Aggravated wounding (intent to commit or facilitate)

Answer 7

R v Tihi (1989)
In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a) - (c) it must be shown that the offender meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw that the actions underatken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.

R v Sturm (2007)
Under section 191(1)(a) it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed.

Question 8

Aggravated wounding (intent to avoid arrest or facilitate flight)

Answer 8

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

Question 9

Stupefies

Answer 9

R v Sturm (2007)
To stupefy 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.

Question 10

Incapable of resistance

Answer 10

R v Crossan [1943]

Incapable of resistance includes a powerlessness of the will as well as a physical incapacity.