Assault

Question 1

What are the three forms of assault and where are they codified?

Answer 1

Common Assault in Section 196
Aggravated Assault in Sections 192-194, 194A and 2020C
Interpersonal Violence in Sections 188-189

Question 2

What are the four types of assaults as evidenced in section 196; Common Assault?

Answer 2

4 types of common assault

1. Application of force
2. Attempted application of force
3. A threat, in act or gesture, to apply force when the ability to do so is present
4. A threat, in act or gesture, to apply force to another which causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that force will be applied

Either directly or indirectly

Question 3

What are the three crimes that manifest out of the 4 types of assault in Section 196?

Answer 3

Physical assault or attempted ( Application or attempted application)

Physic (Threat when present or reasonable grounds)

Question 4

What is defined as force for the purposes of assault?

Answer 4

Force is defined as touching of any degree and it need not be violent

Question 5

What are the mediums by which force can be conducted?

Answer 5

Can be conducted through a variety of mediums such as;

Electricity (Kovalev v R)
Spitting (Hugh v NZ Police)

Question 6

What are the actus reus requirements of common assault?

Answer 6

Application of force in a proactive or positive act
To the person of another, hair and clothing
Directly or indirectly, use of any medium

Question 7

What does Kovalev v R say regarding force?

Answer 7

Force can occur through an additional step before it is applied to the victim. Force via extra steps is still assault

Question 8

What are the mens rea requirements of common assault?

Answer 8

Intention to use force - R v Young

Intention to threat and threaten victim - Steinberg v Police

Question 9

What if another target instead of the intended is hit for the purposes of common assault?

Answer 9

Mens rea is transferred to that person however, it does not change the malice of the crime

Question 10

For a psychic assault, via threat, does the victim have to be aware?

Answer 10

Statute says no however reasonable grounds threat, the fourth type, requires awareness by nature

Question 11

R v Kerr as it relates to awareness?

Answer 11

Court ruled that the victim need not be aware.

Axe welding stranger approaches sleeping mum then pulls pants down, held as assault despite her being asleep.

Question 12

What if the mistaken belief on reasonable grounds for the purposes of a psychic assault?

Answer 12

Mistaken belief is fine, this is a subjective standard. Does not matter if the accused had ability in fact or not but what the victim thought reasonably.

Question 13

Do words constitute a threat and therefore assault for the purposes of a psychic assault?

Answer 13

No, must be accompanied by act or gesture however slight.

Question 14

What are the statutes that govern aggravated assault?

Answer 14

Sections 192(1) - Assault with further intent
Sections 192 (2)- Assault on law enforcement officer
Sections 193- Assault with intent to injure
Sections 194- Assault on women and children
Sections 194A- Assault on family members
Sections 202C- Assault with weapons

Question 15

What provision of the crimes act governs (aggravated) assault with further intent?

Answer 15

Section 192(1)

Everyone is liable max 3 years when committing an assault to further intent to commit other crimes, avoid detection or for others, avoid arrest or for others

Question 16

Do hollow threats constitutes a threat?

Answer 16

If a threat does not neutralise itself then it is still an assault

Question 17

What provision governs (aggravated) assault that results in injury?

Answer 17

Section 193

Liable for max 3 years when assault occurs with injury

Question 18

What provision governs (aggravated) assault on women and children?

Answer 18

Section 194

Assault on children under 14 years or male on female is liable for max 2 years

Question 19

What provision governs (aggravated) assault on family members?

Answer 19

Section 194A

Anyone who assaults a family member is liable for max 2 years

Question 20

What is defined as family for the purposes of aggravated assault on family members?

Answer 20

Section 12 Family Violence Act

• Spouse
• Family Member
• Blood relative sharing same house
• Had a close personal relationship

Question 21

What provision covers (aggravated) assault on law enforcement officers?

Answer 21

Section 192(2)

Liable for max 3 years when assaulting a law enforcement officer or anyone helping them with intent to obstruct their duties

Question 22

What provision covers (aggravated) assault with weapons?

Answer 22

Section 202C

Assault on any person with weapon or an intention to use weapon in surrounding liable for max 5 years

Question 23

What are two provisions governing interpersonal violence not based on assault?

Answer 23

Section 188 and 189 based on harm

Question 24

What are the two main groups of harm with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 24

Degree of harm ranging from actual to grievous to death

Technical categories of harm

Question 25

What constitutes bodily harm?

Answer 25

Injury to any part of the body and/or its mental capacities - R v Chan Fook

Question 26

Is harm to a foetus bodily harm?

Answer 26

A foetus is not a human being in the eyes of the law but is so connected to the mother to constitute being a part of the mother - R v King

Question 27

What are the three technical categories of harm?

Answer 27

Wound that break the skin or skinish membrane seen through blood Maiming that permanently removes body part Disfigure to deface, deform, mar or alter appearance

Question 28

How does section 188 (wound with intent) manifest degrees and technical categories of harm?

Answer 28

14 years for those that wound (or graver), or cause GBH with intent to do so 7 years for both; for wounding (or graver), or cause GBH but only intended to injure for wounding (or graver), or cause GBH, with reckless disregard for safety of others

Question 29

How does section 189 (injure with intent) manifest the degrees and technical categories of harm?

Answer 29

Lower degree harm than 188 To injure, with intent to do more (GBH) To injure, with intent to do so to injure, with reckless disregard for safety of others 10 years for offence resulting in injury but with intent to go further to GBH 5 years for offence resulting in injury, whose intent it was to cause injury or with reckless disregard

Question 30

Where does strangulation stand with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 30

Section 189A AC: Blocking nose or mouth, pressure to throat or neck by any means MR: Intention or recklessness 7 years

Question 31

What is section 190 with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 31

Degree of injuring would be paramount to manslaughter if death had occurred 3 years

Question 32

What is section 191 with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 32

Liable for max 14 years anyone who commits a crime, avoid detection and arrest with intent does aforesaid interpersonal crimes 7 years max for mere injury

Question 33

What is section 197 with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 33

Liable for max 5 years, anyone who stupefies or renders unconscious other people who might hinder their crimes

Question 34

What constitutes stupefaction for s 197?

Answer 34

Suppression of the mind or nervous system to lower resistance

Question 35

What is section 201 with regards to interpersonal violence?

Answer 35

Liable for max 14 years anyone who wilfully causes or produces disease or sickness in others

Question 36

What are the three defences to assault?

Answer 36

Defence of consent Defence of common intercourse Defence of domestic discipline

Question 37

Where in the crimes act is the defence of consent located with respects to assault?

Answer 37

Common law defence of consent codified in section 20 Knew that victim did not consent or had no reasonable grounds to do so Mistaken belief is a defence (Lee)

Question 38

What does the case of R v Lee stand for with regards to the defence of consent?

Answer 38

R v Lee established 4 tiers of harm and where consent falls 1. No bodily harm - absolute defence 2. Actual Bodily harm - absolute except street fighting 3. Grievous bodily harm - for the trial judge 4. Death - not available

Question 39

What criteria must the trial judge consider when considering whether consent is a defence on GBH crimes?

Answer 39

Personal Autonomy, social utility, seriousness of intended injury or risked, level of risk, rationality of consent and other relevant factors

Question 40

Can the tier system be misapplied for defences of consent?

Answer 40

See R v Barker - uncontrolled environment for tattoos Trial Judge declared the crime to be only bodily harm but said that the defence of consent was not available for policy reasons under GBH. The only permissible withdrawal is for street righting which this was not. Overturned on appeal, only at GBH can the trial judge insert personal considerations. Misapplication of tiers

Question 41

How does S v R modify the tier system for the defence of consent?

Answer 41

In S v R, the appellant smashed a girls finger when she consented to the act to show her loyalty to him. No intention for GBH but consent withdrawn. Argued the case result from Baker, that since it was not a GBH crime then consent should not be withdrawn. Court ruled that in cases of bodily harm, there may be a sliding scale and for this case, the result ended near GBH which was enough to negate on policy reasons.

Question 42

What is the threshold for defence of common intercourse?

Answer 42

Disproportionate touching outside day to day interactions is an assault

Question 43

When can the defence of domestic discipline be used?

Answer 43

Can be used to prevent but not to punish