Violence Case Law (Serious Assaults) Flashcards
R v Taisalika (Must Know)
The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced on the complainant’s head would point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.
DPP v Smith (Must Know)
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.
R v Waters (Must Know)
“A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of the skin will be normally evidenced by a flow of blood and, in 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 Rapana and Murray (Must Know)
The word ‘disfigure’ covers “not only permanent damage but also temporary damage”.
R v Donovan (Must Know)
‘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, no doubt, be more than merely transitory and trifling.
Cameron v R (Must Know)
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 Tihi (must know)
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 whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate.
