Violence Offences 2022 Flashcards
Wounding with intent
Section? And Act
Section 188, Crimes Act 1961
Name the two types of intention
First there must be an intention to commit the act
Second an intention to get a specific result
What circumstantial evidence can an offenders intent be proved under
- The offenders actions and words before, during and after the event.
- the surrounding circumstances
- the nature of the act itself
In serious assault cases additional circumstantial evidence that may prove an offenders intent may include
- prior threats
- evidence of premeditation
- the use of a weapon
- whether any weapon used was opportunistic or purposely brought
- the number of blows
- the degree of force used
- the body parts targeted by the offender (eg the head)
- the degree of resistance or helplessness of the victim (eg unconscious
R V Taisalika
The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced in the complainants head would point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent
Define grievous bodily harm
Harm that is really serious
DDP V SMITH
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”
Explain psychiatric injury under bodily harm in S188
Bodily harm in s188 includes really serious psychiatric injury identified as such by appropriate specialist evidence.
R v WATERS
A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of 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.
What is the difference between the terms wounds, maims and disfigures and the term grievous
Wounds, maims and disfigures refer to the type of injury caused.
Grievous refers to the degree of seriousness of the injury
Define maiming
Maiming involves mutilating, crippling or disabling a part of the body so as to deprive the victim of the use of a limb or of one of the senses
Define disfigurement
Disfigurement means to deform or deface; to mark or alter the figure or appearance of a person
R v RAPANA AND MURRAY
The word disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage
It is not necessary that the person suffering the harm was the intended victim. Where the defendant mistakes the identity of the person injured or where harm intended for one person is accidentally inflicted on another he is still criminally responsible this is known as
The doctrine of transferred malice
Define injure per s2 Crimes Act 1961
To injure means to cause actual bodily harm
Define Actual bodily harm
May be internal or external and it need not be permanent or dangerous.
R v Donovan
‘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 or trifling
Define Reckless disregard
Acting recklessly involves consciously and deliberately taking an unjustifiable risk.
How does one prove reckless disregard
It must be proved not only that the defendant was aware of the risk and proceeded regardless (subjective test) but also that it was unreasonable for him to do so (objective test)
Cameron v R
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
Name the four degrees under section 188(1) of crimes Act 1961
Wounds, maims, disfigures or causes grievous bodily harm
Name the offence under section 188(1)
Everyone is liable who With intent to cause grievous bodily harm to anyone, wounds, maims, disfigures, or causes grievous bodily harm to any person
Name the offence under section 188(2) Crimes Act 1961
Wounding with intent to injure
Everyone who with intent to injure anyone, or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, wounds, maims, disfigures or causes grievous bodily harm to any person
What offence falls under section 189(1) Crimes Act 1961
Injuring with intent
Everyone who with intent to cause grievous bodily harm to anyone, injures any person
What offence falls under section 189(2)
Injuring with intent to injure
Everyone who with intent injure anyone, or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, injures any person
How many years imprisonment is there under section 189(1)
Injuring with intent to gbh
A term not exceeding 10 years
What term of imprisonment is there under section 188(1)
A term not exceeding 14 years imprisonment
What sentence of imprisonment can be imposed under section 188(2)
A term not exceeding 7 years imprisonment
What term of imprisonment can be imposed under section 189(2)
Injuring with intent injures or reckless
A term not exceeding 5 years
What offence falls under section 191(1) Crimes Act 1961
Aggravated wounding
Everyone who with intent
(a) to commit or facilitate the commission of any imprisonable offence; or
(b) to avoid detection of himself or of any other person in the commission of any imprisonable offence; or
(c) to avoid the arrest or facilitate the flight of himself or any other person upon the commission or attempted commission of any imprisonable offence - wounds, maims, disfigures, or causes grievous bodily harm to any person, or stupefies or renders unconscious any person, or by any violent means renders any person incapable of resistance.
What is the offence under section 191(2) Crimes Act 1961
Aggravated injury
Everyone who with intent to
a) to commit or facilitate the commission of any imprisonable offence; or
(b) to avoid detection of himself or of any other person in the commission of any imprisonable offence; or
(c) to avoid the arrest or facilitate the flight of himself or any other person upon the commission or attempted commission of any imprisonable offence - injures any person
Define aggravate
To aggravate means to make it worse or more serious
Under section 191 if the person assaulted suffers no actual bodily harm what would the appropriate charge be
Aggravated assault under section 192 Crimes Act
In proving an offence against section 191 the prosecution must satisfy a two fold test for intent explain this
- The defendant intended to facilitate the commission of an imprisonable offence (or one of the other intents specified in paragraphs (a) (b) or (c) and
- He or she intended to cause the specified harm or was reckless as to that risk
R v Tihi
In addition to one of the specific intents outlines in paragraphs (a) or (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”
Define facilitate
Means to make possible, or to make easy or easier
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
Define stupefies
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.
Define render unconscious
Render means to cause to be or cause to become
Cause the victim to lose consciousness
What offence falls under section 192(1) Crimes Act 1961
Aggravated Assault
Everyone who assaults any other person with intent
(a) To commit or facilitate the commission of any imprisonable offence; or
(b) to avoid detection of himself or of any other person in the commission if any imprisonable offence; or
(c) to avoid the arrest or facilitate the flight of himself or of any other person. Upon the commission or attempted commission of any imprisonable offence
What offence falls under section 192(2) Crimes Act 1961
Aggravated assault
Anyone who assaults any Constable or any person acting in aid of any Constable, or any person in the lawful execution of any process, with intent to obstruct the person so assaulted in the execution of his duty
What must you prove for aggravated assault under section 192(1)
- intention to apply or attempt to apply force to another
- application or attempted application of force, whether directly or indirectly, or
- threaten to apply force in circumstances where the victim believes the offender will be able to carry out the threat
And intent, prove the offender intended, at the time of the assault, to commit an imprisonable offence or help commit an imprisonable offence, or avoid detection or arrest or facilitate their flight or another’s flight after committing an imprisonable offence
Proving aggravated assault 191(2)
Must prove the assault elements
And intent at time of assault to obstruct the Constable, person coming to their aid, or anyone executing lawful duty
What offence is under section 198 (1) Crimes Act 1961
Discharging firearm or doing a dangerous act with intent
(a) Everyone who with intent to do grievous bodily harm discharges any firearm, air gun, or other similar weapon at any person or
(b) Sends or delivers to any person, or puts in any place, any explosive or injurious substance or device or
(c) sets fire to any property
What offence is under Section 198(2)
Discharging a firearm or doing a dangerous act
Everyone who with intent to injure, or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, does any acts referred to in section 1 of this Act
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
Define discharge
Means to fire or shoot
Define Firearm
Means anything from which any shot, bullet, missile or other projectile can be discharged by force of explosive
Define air gun
Includes any air rifle, any air pistol and any weapon from which the use of gas or compressed air (not by force of explosive) any shot, bullet, missile or other projectile can be discharged
When is the offence under section 198(1)(b) who with intent sends or delivers to any person, or outs in any place, any explosive or injurious substance or device
Complete
The offence is complete when an explosive or an injurious substance or device is sent, delivered, or put in place. However the substance must have the capacity to explode or cause injury
Under section 198(1)(c) what else is sufficient to prove the offence
Melting, blistering of paint or significant smoke damage may be sufficient to prove the offence
What offence falls under 198(2) Crimes Act 1961
Everyone who, with intent to injure, or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, does any of the acts referred to in section 1 of this section
Define Property
Defined by s2 includes real and personal property, and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, money, electricity, and any debt, and any thing in action, and any other right or interest
What offence falls under 198A(1) of Crimes Act 1961
Everyone who, uses any firearm in any manner whatever against any constable, or any traffic officer, or any prison officer, acting in the course of his or her duty knowing that, or being reckless whether or not, that person is a member of the police or a traffic officer or prison officer so acting
What offence falls under section 198A(2)
Everyone who uses any firearm in any manner whatever with intent to resist the lawful arrest or detention of himself or herself or of any other person
R v SWAIN
To deliberately or purposely remove a sawn-off shotgun from a bag after being confronted by or called upon by a police constable amounts to a use of that firearm within meaning if s198A CA1961
Define Constable
Policing Act 2008
(a) holds the office of constable (whether appointed as a constable under the Police Act 1958 or this act) and
(b) includes a constable who holds any level of position within the New Zealand police
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
Section 198B CA 1961 commission of an imprisonable offence with a firearm
(1) everyone who
(a) in committing any imprisonable offence, uses any firearm; or
(b) while committing any imprisonable offence, has any firearm with him or her in circumstances that prims facie show an intention to use it in connection with that imprisonable offence
What offence falls under section 234(1) CA 1961
Robbery is theft accompanied by violence or threats of violence to any person or property, used to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistance to its being stolen
What offence falls under Section 234(2) CA 1961
Everyone who commits robbery is liable for a term not exceeding 10 years
Define theft
Dishonest taking, or dishonest handling or dealing with the goods acquired in any manner, where there is an absence of claim of right and an intention that an owner of the property stolen be permanently deprived of the relevant ownership
Dishonestly
Dishonestly, in relation to an act or omission, means done or omitted without a belief that there was express or implied consent to, or authority for, the act or omission from a person entitled to give such consent or authority
Define claim of right
Claim of right in relation to any act means a belief at the time of the act in a proprietary or possessory right in property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed, although that belief may be based in ignorance or mistake of fact or of any matter of law other than the enactment against which the offence is alleged to have been committed
What is discussed in R v CROSSAN incapable of resistance
The defendant intending to rape the victim, presented a loaded revolver at her and threatened to shoot her unless she submitted to sexual intercourse.
A mere threat may not in itself be sufficient to constitute violent means but when the person making the threat is brandishing a loaded revolver. It can be said she was rendered incapable of resistance by any violent means
Discuss the case law R v Joyce together with
The crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time of the robbery was committed or the assault occurred
In r v Tihi there is a two fold test describe this
In addition to the specific intents outlined in para (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
Define injurious substance and provide an example
Covers a range of things capable of causing harm to a person, for example, a letter containing anthrax powder that is mailed to a political target.
Boiling water has been held to be destructive substance
Assault with intent to Rob
section 236, Crimes Act 1961
(1) everyone is liable to imprisonment for term, not exceeding 14 years who with intent Rob any person
(a) causes grievous, bodily harm to that person or any other person or;
(b) being armed, with any offensive, weapon, or instrument, or anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument, assaults that person or any other person or;
(c) being together with any other person, or persons assault that person or any other person.
(2) everyone who assaults any person with intent to rob that person, or any other person is liable to imprisonment for a term, not exceeding seven years
Define assault
Assault means the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to the person of another directly or indirectly, or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to the person of another, if the person making the threat has or causes the other to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she has present ability to affect his or her purpose, and to assault has a corresponding meaning
Blackmail
Section 237, Crimes Act 1961
(1) everyone commits blackmail, who threatens expressly, or by implication to make any accusation against any person (wether or living or dead)to disclose something about any person (wether living or dead), or to cause serious damage to property, or endanger, the safety of any person with intent
(a) to cause the person to whom the threat is made to act in accordance with the will of the person making the threat; and
(b) to obtain any benefit or to cause loss to any other person.
(2) everyone who acts in the manner described in subsection one is guilty of blackmail, even though the person believes that he or she is entitled to the benefit or to cause the loss, unless the making of the threat is, in the circumstances, a reasonable and proper means for effecting his or her purpose.
(3) in tis section and in section 239 benefit means any benefit, pecuniary, advantage, privilege, property, service, or valuable consideration
Blackmail, must prove
The identity of the suspect and that they threatened expressly or by implication, to:
Make any accusation against any person (living or dead)
Disclose something about any person(living or dead)
Cause serious damage to property, or
Endanger the safety of any person
And that the suspect intended to
Cause the person to whom the threat is made to act in accordance with the will of the person making the threat and
Obtain any benefit or to cause loss to any other person
Aggravated robbery
Section 235 crimes act 1961
Everyone is liable to imprisonment for a term, not exceeding 14 years who
(a) robs any person, and at the time of or immediately before or immediately after the robbery causes, grievous bodily harm to any person or
(b) being together with any other person, or persons, robs, any person, or
(c) being armed, with any offensive, weapon, or instrument, or anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument, robs any other person.
DDP V SMITH
Bodily harm needs no explanation and grievous means no more and no less than really serious harm
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.
R V SKIVINGTON
Theft is en element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to theft, then it negatives one of the elements in the offence of robbery. Without proof of which the full offence is not complete
R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary
R v Maihi
It is implicit in accompany that there must be a nexus between the act of stealing and the threat of violence. Both must be present. However the term does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous
R v Galey
Being together in the context of 235(b) involves two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force, either in any even or as circumstances might require, directly in the perpetration of the crime.
What is a statutory defence against blackmail
It is a defence to a charge of blackmail if the defendant believed they were entitled to obtain the benefit or cause the loss and objectively viewed they making if a threat was a reasonable and proper means for obtaining the benefit or causing the loss
Demanding with intent to steal
Section 239, CA 1961
(1) Everyone who without claim of right, by force or with any threat, compels any person to execute, make, accept, endorse, alter, or destroy any document capable of conferring a pecuniary advantage with intent to obtain any benefit.
(2) everyone who with menaces or by any threat demands any property from any person with intent to steal.
Abduction for marriage or sexual connection
Section 208 CA 1961
Everyone who unlawfully takes away or detains a person whiteouts their condense or with their consent obtained by fraud or duress -
(a) with intent to go through a form of marriage or civil union with that person or
(b) with intent to have sexual connection. With that person or,
(c) with intent to cause that person to go through a form of marriage or civil union, or to have sexual connection, with some other person.
What must be proved for abduction (6)
- The defendant took away or detained a person
- The taking or detention was intentional
- The taking or detention was unlawful
- The taking or detention was without that person’s consent( or with consent induced by fraud or duress).
- The defendant knew that there was no consent to the taking or detention and
- The defendant intended to:
(a) Go through a form of marriage, or civil union with the person taken or detained; or
(b) have sexual connection with the person taken or detained; or
(c) cause the person taken or detained to go through a form of marriage, or civil union to another person or to have sexual connection with another person
Define unlawful
Without lawful justification, authority or excuse.
R v Wellard
The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be
Explain the difference between taking away and detaining quote case law
R v CROSSAN taking away and detaining are “separate and distinct offences. The first consists of taking the victim away, the second of detaining her. The first offence was complete when the prisoner took the woman away against her will. Then having taken her away, he detained her against her will, and his conduct in detaining her constituted a new a different offence.
R v PRYCE
Detaining is an active concept meaning to keep in confinement or custody this is to be contrasted to the passive concept of harbouring or mere failure to hand over
R v Mohi
The offence is complete once there has been a period of detention or taking accompanied by the necessary intent, regardless of whether that intent was carried out
R v WAAKA
Intent may be formed at any time during the taking away. If a taking away commences without the intent to have intercourse, but that intent is formed during the taking away, then that is sufficient for the purposes of the section
Kidnapping
Section 209, CA 1961
Everyone who, unlawfully takes away or detains a person without his or her consent or with his or her consent obtained by fraud or duress -
(a) with intent to hold him or her for ransom or to service; or
(b) with intent to cause him or her to be confined or imprisoned; or
(c) with intent to cause him or her to be sent or taken out of New Zealand.
For a conviction of kidnapping the crown must prove
- The defendant took away or detained a person
- Taking or detention was intentional or deliberate
- Taking or detention was unlawful
- Taking was done with out that persons consent(or with consent induced by fraud or duress)
- Defendant knew that there was no consent to the taking or detention and
(a) hold the person for ransom or to service; or
(b) cause the person to be confined or imprisoned
(c) cause the person to be sent or takin out of New Zealand
R v M
The crown must prove that the accused intended to take away or detain the complainant and that he or she knew that the complainant was not consenting.
Abduction of young person u16
Section 210 CA 1961
(1) everyone who with intent to deprive a parent or guardian or other person having lawful care or charge of a young person of the possession of the young person, unlawfully takes or entices away or detains the young person.
(2) everyone who receives a young person, knowing that he or she has been unlawfully taken or enticed away or detained with intent to deprive a parent or guardian or other person having lawful care or charge of him or her of the possession of him or her.
(3) (a) it is immaterial whether the young person consents or is taken or goes or is received at his or her own suggestion; and
(b) it is immaterial whether the offender believes the young person to be of or over the age of 16
(4) in this section young person means a person under age of 16
For a conviction under section 210(1) abduction of a young person u16 crown must prove
1 = unlawfully takes or entices away or detains the young person
- The defendant took, enticed, or detained a person u16
- The taking, enticement, or detention was intentional
- The taking, enticement, detention was from a person who had lawful care, or charge of the young person
- The defendant knew the other person had lawful care, or charge of the yp.
- The taking, enticement, or detention was unlawful and
- It was done with intent to deprive a parent, guardian or other person having lawful care or charge of the yp of possession of that YP.
For a conviction under section 210(2) crown must prove
(2) = receives YP
1. The defendant received a person U16
2. Receiving was intentional
3. The defendant knew the YP had been unlawfully taken or enticed away or detained by another from a parent, guardian or other person having lawful care or charge of YP of possession of that YP and
4. The defendant intended by reason of the receiving to deprive a parent, guardian or other person having lawful care or charge of him or her of the possession of that YP.
What intent must there be under section 210 (1)
Abduction of YP
There must be intention to take away or entice or detain YP and also a specific intent to deprive the parent or other specified person of the possession of the child.
Define accusation
Accusation will normally refer to an allegation that the person is guilty of criminal offending whether or not formal charges have been filed. It is immaterial whether the substance of the accusation is true or false, and the accusation does not need to relate to the person from who the demand is made
Define taking away
Situations where the victim is physically removed from one place to another.
R v WELLARD
The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be
R v CROSSAN kidnapping
Taking away and detaining are seperate and distinct offences. The first consists of taking the victim away: the second of detaining her. The first offence was complete when the prisoner took the women away against her will. Then having taken her away, he detained her against her will. And his conduct in detaining her constituted a new and different offence.
Define detaining
Detaining is a active concept meaning to keep in confinement or custody. This is to be contrasted to the passive concept of harbouring or mere failure to hand over
R v MOHI
The offence is complete once there has been a period of detention or a taking accompanied by the necessary intent, regardless of whether that intent was carried out
R v WAAKA
Intent may be formed at anytime during the taking away. If a taking away commences without the intent to have intercourse, but that intent is formed during the taking away. Then that is sufficient for the purposes of the section
Kidnapping
Section 209, CA 1961
Everyone who unlawfully takes away or detains a person without his or her consent or with his or her consent obtained by fraud or duress
(a) with intent to hold him/her for ransom or to service: or
(b) with intent to cause him/her to be confined or imprisoned; or
(c) with intent to cause him or her to be sent or taken out of New Zealand.
What must the crown prove for a conviction under s209
Kidnapping
1. Defendant took away or detained a person;
2. Taking or detention was intentional or deliberate
3. Taking or detention was unlawful
4. Taking was done with out that persons consent( or with consent produced by fear or duress)
5. Defendant knew that there was no consent to the taking or detention : and
6. Defendant intended to:
(a) hold the person for ransom or to service
(b) cause the person to be confined or imprisoned; or
(c) cause the person to be sent or taken out of New Zealand.
R v M
The crown must prove that the accused intended to take away or detain the complainant and that he or she knew the complainant was not consenting
What are three possible forms of men’s rea for Sec 198
Intent to do gbh (1)
Intent to injure (2)
Reckless disregard for the safety of others (2)
