VIOLENCE - Case Law

Question 1

R v SKIVINGTON

Answer 1

R v SKIVINGTON

• Larceny [or theft] is an ingredient of robbery,
• If a man has an honest belief that he has a claim of right it is a defence to larceny,
• And negatives one of the ingredients
• Which without it, proof of the full offence is not made out.”

Question 2

R v LAPIER

Answer 2

R v LAPIER

Robbery is complete

• The instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary.

Question 3

R v MAIHI

Answer 3

R v MAIHI

• There must be a nexus (connection or link) between the act of stealing and the threat of violence.
• Both must be present but need not be contemporaneous.

Question 4

PENEHA v POLICE

Answer 4

PENEHA v POLICE

The actions of the defendant

• forcibly interfere with personal freedom or
• cause a violent action or motion
• tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort”.

Question 5

R v JOYCE

Answer 5

R v JOYCE

The Crown must establish-

• That at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred.”

Question 6

R v BROUGHTON

Answer 6

R v BROUGHTON

A threat of violence is

• An intention to inflict violence unless the money or property is handed over.
• The threat may be direct or veiled.
• It may be conveyed by words or conduct, or a combination of both.”

Question 7

R v GALEY

Answer 7

R v GALEY

TOGETHER WITH

• two or more persons
• having the common intention
• to use their combined force,
• in any event or circumstance
• in the perpetration of the crime.

Question 8

R v MOHAN and R v WAAKA

Answer 8

R v MOHAN

Intent involves “a decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence

R v WAAKA

A “fleeting or passing thought” is not sufficient; there must be a “firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act”

Question 9

R v TAISALIKA

Answer 9

R v TAISALIKA

• The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced on the complainant’s head
• would strongly point to the presence of the necessary intent.

Question 10

DPP v SMITH

Answer 10

DPP v SMITH

“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.

Question 11

R v WATERS

Answer 11

R v WATERS

A wound is the breaking of the skin with the flow of blood which can be internal or external.

Question 12

R v DONOVAN

Answer 12

R v DONOVAN

• ‘Bodily harm’ … includes any hurt or injury that interferes with the health or comfort of [the victim] …
• it need not be permanent, but must be more than merely transitory and trifling.

Question 13

R v HARNEY

Answer 13

R v HARNEY

“[Recklessness involves] foresight of dangerous consequences that could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.”

Question 14

R v TIHI

Answer 14

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:

• meant to cause the specified harm,

or

• foresaw his actions were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.