Grievous Bodily Harm and Wounding: Advanced Non-Fatal Offences

This page delves into the more serious non-fatal offences of Grievous Bodily Harm $GBH$ and wounding, which are essential topics for Non-fatal offences A Level Law exam questions.

GBH and Wounding (Section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861)

This offence is defined as "intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm or wounding."

Actus Reus of GBH and Wounding

The actus reus of this offence involves causing either GBH or a wound. Key points include:

• GBH is defined as 'serious harm' $Smith; Saunders cases$.
• Wounding is any break in the continuity of the skin $Eisenhower case$.
• The severity of injuries should be assessed according to the health and age of the victim $Bollom case$.
• Serious psychiatric injury can constitute GBH $Burstow case$.
• Sexually Transmitted Infections $STIs$ can be considered GBH $Dica case$.

Definition: Grievous Bodily Harm $GBH$ refers to 'really serious harm' as established in legal precedents.

Example: In the Dica case, the transmission of HIV was considered to be GBH, illustrating that GBH is not limited to physical injuries.

Mens Rea of GBH and Wounding

The mens rea for this offence can be either:

• Intention to cause some harm
• Recklessness as to causing some harm $Cunningham case$

Highlight: The defendant does not have to intend the serious level of injury, as 'some harm' is sufficient $Parmenter case$.

GBH with Intent (Section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861)

This more serious offence is defined as "causing serious harm or wounding with intent."

Actus Reus of GBH with Intent

The actus reus for this offence is the same as for Section 20 GBH and wounding.

Mens Rea of GBH with Intent

The mens rea for this offence is more stringent, requiring:

• Direct intent $Mohan case$
• Or oblique intent, considering foresight of consequences as a virtual certainty $Nedrick v Woollin case$

Quote: "Foresight of consequences is evidence of intent, but not intention itself" $Matthews v Alleyne case$

This distinction in mens rea between Section 20 and Section 18 offences is crucial for understanding the hierarchy of non-fatal offences in Criminal Law.

Vocabulary: Oblique intent refers to a situation where the defendant foresees a consequence as virtually certain, even if it's not their primary purpose.

Understanding these offences, their elements, and the relevant case law is essential for answering Non-fatal offences A Level Law exam questions and writing comprehensive Non-fatal offences A Level law essays.

Understanding Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person

This page provides a comprehensive overview of assault, battery, and Actual Bodily Harm $ABH$ as defined in criminal law. These offences are crucial components of the OCR A Level Law non-fatal offences evaluation.

Assault (Section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988)

Assault is defined as "intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful violence."

Actus Reus of Assault

The actus reus of assault requires an act that causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful violence. Key points include:

• The act can take various forms, including letters $Constanza case$ and silent phone calls $Ireland case$.
• Apprehension means belief, not necessarily fear $Cambridge case$.
• "Immediate" is interpreted as imminent, not instantaneous Smith & Wooding Police case.
• Words can negate an assault $Tuberville v Savage case$.
• The force the victim apprehends must be unlawful.

Vocabulary: Apprehend in this context means to believe or anticipate, not necessarily to fear.

Example: In the Constanza case, sending threatening letters was considered an act capable of constituting assault.

Mens Rea of Assault

The mens rea for assault can be either:

• Intention $as defined in the Mohan case$
• Recklessness $as defined in the Cunningham case$

Battery (Section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988)

Battery is defined as "intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force to another."

Actus Reus of Battery

The actus reus of battery involves the application of unlawful force. Key points include:

• Force is any touching the victim does not consent to, but must be more than everyday touching $Collins v Wilcock case$.
• It can include touching clothing $Thomas case$.
• Battery can be a continuing act $Fagan v MPC case$ or indirect $DPP v K case$.

Definition: Unlawful force in battery refers to any non-consensual touching that goes beyond socially acceptable everyday contact.

Mens Rea of Battery

The mens rea for battery, like assault, can be either:

• Intention $Mohan case$
• Recklessness $Cunningham case$

Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) (Section 47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861)

ABH is defined as "any assault or battery which amounts to Actual Bodily Harm."

Actus Reus of ABH

The actus reus of ABH requires:

• An assault or battery
• Resulting in Actual Bodily Harm

Highlight: ABH is defined as "any hurt or injury which is calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim" $Miller case$.

Key points about ABH include:

• It includes momentary unconsciousness $T v DPP case$.
• Psychiatric injury can constitute ABH, but must be more than mere emotions such as distress, fear, or panic $Chan Fook; Burstow cases$.

Mens Rea of ABH

The mens rea for ABH is:

• Intention or recklessness as to the assault or battery $Savage; Parmenter cases$
• The defendant does not need to have foreseen the level of harm caused $Roberts case$

Quote: "The defendant did not need to realise ABH" $Roberts case$