Serious Assaults: Case Law Must Know Flashcards
R v Taisalika
The nature of the blow and the gash which it produces on the complainants head would point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent
R v Rapana and Murray
The word ‘disfigure’ covers not only permanent damage but temporary damage.
DPP v Smith
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.
R v Waters
” a breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of the skin will normally be evinced by a flow of blood and, 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.”
R v Donovan
‘Bodily harm’ … includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort if the victim … it need not be permanent, but must, no doubt, be more than transitory or trifling.
Cameron v R
Recklessness is established if:
(a) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
- his or her actions would bring about the proscribed result; and
- that the proscribed circumstances existed; and
(b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable.
R v Tihi
In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a), (b), or (c), “it must be shown that the offender either meant to cause the specified harm, or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it”.
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 who’s arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate.
R v Pekepo
A reckless discharge of a firearm in the general direction of a passer-by who happens to be hit is not sufficient proof. An intention to shoot that person must be established.
R v Swain
To deliberately or purposefully remove a sawn-off shotgun from a bag after being confronted or called upon by a police constable amounts to a use of that firearm within the meaning of s 198A Crimes Act 1961.
Fisher v R
It is necessary in order to establish a charge under section 198A(2) for the Crown to prove that the accused knew someone was attempting to arrest or detain him because otherwise the element of mens rea of intending to resist lawful arrest or detention cannot be established.
