Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

z A2 Law - Non-fatal Offences > Wounding And Grievous Bodily Harm > Flashcards

Wounding And Grievous Bodily Harm Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

Under what section of the offences against the persons act 1861 is GBH?

A

S20

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

For the defendant to be convicted of a s20 what must the prosecution prove?

A

The defendant either wounded the victim or inflicted GBH

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What does ‘wounding’ mean?

A

Breaking the surface of the skin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the problem with the word ‘wounding’?

A

Internal bleeding is not a wound even though it is often very serious but w minor cut would be

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What case illustrates the problem with the term ‘wounding’?

A

Wood (1830)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What case happened in 1830?

A

Wood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

In what year was the case of Wood?

A

1830

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What happened in the case of Wood (1830)?

A

Wood broke the victims collar bone but as the skin was still intact he could not be found guilty of wounding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What has changed since the case of Wood (1830)?

A

There are now better guidelines for appropriate injuries, the crown prosecution charging standards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What happened in the case of JCC v Eisenhower (1984)?

A

The victim was hit in the eye with a shot gun pellet which caused internal rupturing of the blood vessels but as there was no cut there was no wound.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What was held in the case of DPP v Smith (1961)?

A

That grievous bodily harm means ‘really serious harm’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What can courts take into account when examining the case?

A

The characteristics of the victim such as their age and healthy which could mean the harm is more serious for them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What was accepted in the case of R v Dica (2004)?

A

Biological harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What happened in the case of R v Dica (2004)?

A

The defendant infected two women with HIV when he had unprotected sex with them knowing he was HIV positive but did not tell them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was the outcome of R v Dica (2004)?

A

Biological harm was accepted as GBH

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case happened in 2004?

A

R v Dica

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

In what year was the case of R v Dica?

A

2004

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What case is relevant to the court considering the characteristics on the victim?

A

R v Bollom (2003)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What case happened in 2003?

A

R v Bollom

20
Q

When was the case of R v Bollom?

A

2003

21
Q

What happened in the case of R v Bollom (2003)?

A

The victim was a 17 month old baby who suffered bruising and abrasions to her body, arms and legs

22
Q

What did the court rule in R v Bollom (2003)?

A

That the was GBH because it could have been really serious in spite of her age and frailty

23
Q

What did the case of R v Burstow (1997) set out’

A

That the use of the word ‘inflict’ in s20 means the same as cause. This can be direct or indirect. If the defendants actions have led to the victim suffering GBH that is enough.

24
Q

What happened in the case of R v Burstow (1997)?

A

The defendant was obsessed with a woman at work and he stalked her for serval months and carried out a campaign of harassment e.g stealing her underwear, silent phone calls, damaging her car. She suffered severe depression as a result.

25
Q

Why did the House of Lords uphold the conviction in R v Burstow (1997)

A

Because the defendants indirect actions had led to her having serious psychiatric injury

26
Q

What are some of the crown prosecution services charging standards examples of serious harm?

A

Injury resulting in permanent disability
Compound fractures
Injuries causing substantial loss of blood

27
Q

What’s the men’s rea for s20 offences?

A

The defendant must either intend to cause some harm or be subjectively reckless (must be aware of some harm).

28
Q

What cases illustrate the men’s rea for s20 offences?

A

R v Parmenter (1991)

R v Grimshaw (1984)

29
Q

What year was R v Parmenter?

A

1991

30
Q

What case happened in 1991?

A

R v Parmenter

31
Q

What happened in the case of R v Parmenter (1991)?

A

The defendant threw his 3 month old baby in the air and caught him, causing serious injury to the babies legs

32
Q

What was the outcome of R v Parmenter (1991)?

A

His conviction for s20 was quashed

33
Q

What does the case of R v Grimshaw (1984) illustrate?

A

The point of the men’s rea that the defendant need only be aware of the risk of some harm - not necessarily serious harm

34
Q

What case took place on 1984?

A

R v Grimshaw

35
Q

When was the case of R v Grimshaw?

A

1984

36
Q

What happened in the case of R v Grimshaw (1984)?

A

The defendant heard someone insult her boyfriend while they were in the pub so she pushed the glass she was holding onto his face

37
Q

What was the outcome of R v Grimshaw (1984)?

A

She was convicted GBH because she had foreseen some risk even though it was more serious than she initially intended.

38
Q

Under which act and section is GBH under?

A

S20 offences against the persons act 1861: wounding and grievous bodily harm

39
Q

What are the types of GBH?

A

S20 offences against the persons act 1861: wounding and GBH

S18 offences against the persons act 1861: wounding or GBH with intent to do some GBH

40
Q

What is the actus reus for an S20 offences against a person?

A

Unlawfully
Wound
or inflict GBH
on another person

41
Q

What is the actus reus for s18 offences against a person act 1861?

A

The same as s20:

Unlawfully
Wound
or inflict GBH
on another person

42
Q

How do S18 offences differ from s20 offences?

A

The mens era requires intention to be proven, recklessness will not suffice

43
Q

How can mens rea be proved?

A

There must be evidence of intention e.g it was pre planned

Or as in Nedrick (1968) the musty can decide if intended harm was virtually certain to occur

44
Q

What is the case of Nedrick (1986) related to?

A

The just being able to use the ‘virtual certainty’ as set out in Nedrick to decide if the defendant intended fl cause harm

45
Q

What case happened in 1986?

A

Nedrick

46
Q

When was the case of Nedrick?

A

1986

z A2 Law - Non-fatal Offences (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions