Violence Offences CIB010 Flashcards
(137 cards)
What is S188 Crimes Act 1961?
188 Wounding with intent
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who, with intent to cause grievous bodily harm to any one, wounds, maims, disfigures, or causes grievous bodily harm to any person.
(2) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years 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 is the difference between S188(1) and S188(2)?
(1) - the offender intends to cause GBH
(2) - the offender only intends to injure the victim, although the actual outcome is greater degree of harm than he anticipated. It allows for an alternative mens Rea element involving “reckless disregard for the safety of others”
What are the two specific types of intention?
- Deliberate Act:
‘Intent’ means the act or omission must be done deliberately. It must be more than involuntary or accidental. Under the definition of assault it means “the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply for force”. - Intent to produce a result:
An intent is an intent to produce a specific result. In this context, result means “aim, object, or purpose”.
In regards to S188, who proves intent and to what degree?
Prosecution and beyond reasonable doubt.
What are some examples of circumstantial evidence when proving intent? (not serious)
- the offenders actions and words before, during, and after the event
- the surrounding circumstances
- the nature of the act itself
R v Taisalika
The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced on the complainants head would point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.
What are some examples of circumstantial evidence when proving intent in a serious assault case?
- prior threats
- evidence of premeditation
- the use of a weapon
- whether any weapon used was opportunist or purposely bought
- 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)
If there was an intent to do GBH, does there have to be GBH?
No. The question is not what the wound is, but what wound was intended.
Does there need to be an assault in S188?
No, there is no reference to the use of violence, and it is therefore not necessary to prove an assault in all cases (although most do involve and assault).
DPP v Smith
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.
What does “grievous” refer to?
It refers to the degree of harm rather than to the nature of it or how it was caused.
How is ‘psychiatric injury’ included under ‘bodily harm’ in S188?
“Bodily harm” in S188 includes really serious psychiatric injury identified as such by appropriate specialist evidence.
When referring to S188, what is meant by “not limited to immediate harm”?
The link between cause and effect is a physical one not one of time. The consequences may be delayed, but they are consequences nonetheless. I.e HIV > AIDS (although now you can get medication so will need to be assessed each time).
R v Waters
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 at the site of a blow or impact.
The wound will more often than not be external. But there are those cases where the separation of the tissues may be internal.
What is the difference between ‘wounding’ vs GBH’?
The terms ‘wounds’, ‘maims’ and ‘disfigures’ refer to the type of injury caused, whereas the term ‘grievous’ refers to the degree or seriousness of the injury.
Eg. Stabbing a person in the arm once vs stabbing a person in the chest 5 times.
Define ‘maiming’:
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.
“Depriving another of the use of such of his members as may render him the less able in fighting, either to defend himself or to annoy his adversary”.
Define ‘disfigurement’:
Disfigurement results from the infliction of external injury that detracts from the personal appearance of a person.
“To before or deface; to mar 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.
What is ‘the doctrine of transferred malice’?
It means the person suffering the harm is not necessarily the intended victim. Where the defendant makes a mistake of identity or accidentally inflicting harm on another, he is still criminally responsible under the ‘Doctrine of Transferred Malice’.
What is the difference between injury and GBH?
Where harm is at the lower end of the scale of seriousness, it may amount to injury.
Where harm is at the higher end of the scale of seriousness, it may amount to wounding, maiming, or disfigurement depending on the nature of it, or to GBH depending on its seriousness.
Define ‘actual bodily harm’:
It may be internal or external, and it need not be permanent or dangerous.
Actual bodily harm can include psychiatric injury, if medical evidence confirms an identifiable clinical condition.
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 and trifling.
What must be proved when ‘recklessness’ is an element in the offence?
- that the defendant consciously and deliberately ran a risk (subject test)
- that the risk was one that was unreasonable to take in the circumstances as they were known to the defendant (objective test - based on whether a reasonable person would have taken the risk)
R v Harney
Recklessness means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In NZ it involves proof that the consequence complained of could well have happened, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.