Wounding

Question 1

morjarty v brooks
FACTS

Answer 1

The defendant was arguing with a customer over a disputed payment and struck him causing a cut below his eye. The defendant had asked him to leave but he refused therefore force was lawfully applied

Question 2

morjarty v brooks
LEGAL PRINCIPLE

Answer 2

The defendant used excessive force- definition of wounding ‘an injury to a person by which the continuity of the skin is broken and there is bleeding there is a wound’

Question 3

JCC v eisenhower
FACTS

Answer 3

The defendant shot at a airgun a group of people which hit someone below the eye causing bruising but not breaking the skin. One blood vessel burst below the skin - fluid filled the front of the eye

Question 4

JCC v eisenhower
LEGAL PRINCIPLE

Answer 4

Internal rupture (internal bleeding) isn’t a wound

Question 5

r v dume
FACTS

Answer 5

The defendant maliciously wounded a police officer by releasing a dog which bit the police officer on the leg

Question 6

r v dume
LEGAL PRINCIPLE

Answer 6

The defendant argued the dogs act was as a result of its natural exuberance. The defendant was still liable for wounding