+
Related Flashcards
Related Topics
Cards In This Set
| Front | Back |
|
What is it called when the accused puts another person in fear or apprehension of imminent unlawful contact?
|
Psychic assault
|
|
Which common law cases define assault?
|
Darby v DPP (NSW)2004 Fagan v Metropolitan Commissioner of Police (1969)
|
|
What are the actus reus and mens rea elements of psychic assault?
|
AR: Threatened application of unlawful contact 2. V apprehends imminent unlawful contactMR: 1.intentionally creating apprehension of imminent unlawful contact 2. Recklessly creating apprehension of imminent unlawful contact
|
|
What are the actus reus and mens rea elements of battery?
|
AR: 1. threatened application of unlawful contact 2. without consent of the victimMR: 1. intentionally apply unlawful contact 2. Recklessly apply unlawful contact
|
|
Which section of the crimes act are all common assaults charged ?
|
S61 Common assault prosecuted by indictment:Whosever assaults any person, although not occasioning actual bodily harm, shall be liable to imprisonment for 2 years.
|
|
WHich is more serious? common or aggravated assault?
|
Aggravated assault- Rv Donovan 1934section 59 - assault occasioning actual bodily harm
|
|
WHich section covers wounding or grievous bodily harm (GBH)?
|
33 - it carries a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment. The prosecution has to prove that the accused intended to inflict GBH.
|
|
What offences does section 35 describe?
|
35(1)Reckless grievous bodily harm - in company(2) Reckless grievous bodily harm(3) Reckless wounding - in company(4) Reckless wounding
|
|
What does section 54 cover?
|
Negligence - whosever by any unlawful or negligent act or omission causes grievous bodily harm to any person, shall be liable to imprisonment for two years.Newman (1948)
|
|
What are the facts in Rv Coleman?
|
Pertains to mens rea for common assault
|
|
Which cases illustrate psychic assault?
|
Imminence - Barton v armstrong 1969; Rv Ireland 1997; Zanker v Vartokas Rv Gabriel 2004
conditional threat - Rozsa v Samuels |
