GBH

• What is the offence referred to as GBH under s20 OAPA 1861?


  It is unlawful and malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm upon another person.
• What is the maximum imprisonment for a s20 GBH conviction?


  5 years imprisonment.
• How does s20 GBH compare to s47 ABH in terms of punishment?


  Both carry the same maximum punishment of 5 years imprisonment.
• What are the elements of the Actus Reus for s20 GBH?


  • D must have either wounded V or inflicted grievous bodily harm on V.
  • Both types of injury can occur simultaneously.
• What constitutes a wound under s20 GBH?


  A break in the continuity of the skin, usually accompanied by bleeding.
• Is internal bleeding without a cut considered a wound?

  No, it is considered as inflicting grievous bodily harm instead.
• What was the outcome of JCC v Eisenhower [1984] regarding internal bleeding?


  It was held that internal bleeding without a cut is not a wound.
• Can a kick produce a wound under s20 OAPA 1861?


  Yes, a kick can produce a wound.
• What is the significance of R v Wood [1830] in relation to wounds?


  A broken bone is not considered a wound unless the skin is also broken.
• How should GBH be explained to a jury according to DPP v Smith [1961]?


  It should be given its ordinary and natural meaning, i.e., "really serious harm".
• What did R v Saunders [1985] confirm about the terms "serious" and "really serious" harm?


  There is little difference between "serious" and "really serious" when directing a jury.
• What are the key points from R v Brown and Stratton [1998] regarding GBH?


  • V suffered multiple injuries including a broken nose and teeth.
  • The jury can determine if injuries amount to "really serious harm".
• How is the severity of injuries assessed in GBH cases?


  • Severity is assessed in context of V's age and health.
  • Injuries may be viewed differently based on the victim's condition.
• What did R v Bollom [2004] establish regarding bruising in children?


  Bruising can amount to GBH, especially when considering the victim's age.
• What type of injury can amount to GBH according to R v Ireland and Burstow [1997]?


  Severe psychiatric injury can amount to GBH.
• What was the outcome of R v Dica [2004] regarding HIV transmission?


  D was convicted of inflicting 'biological' GBH for infecting V with HIV.
• What did R v Golding [2014] establish regarding sexually transmitted diseases?


  Conviction for s20 OAPA 1861 was upheld for knowingly transmitting herpes.
• What does the term 'inflict' mean in the context of s20 GBH?


  • 'Inflict' means to cause harm.
  • It does not require an actual assault to occur.
• What did R v Wilson [1984] state about the application of force in GBH cases?


  Force must be violently applied to the body of V for it to be considered GBH.
• How did R v Ireland and Burstow [1997] redefine the meaning of 'inflict'?


  'Inflict' simply means to 'cause' harm.
• What is the Mens Rea for s20 GBH?


  • Defined by the term "maliciously".
  • Intention or subjective recklessness regarding some harm is required.
• What did R v Mowatt [1967] establish regarding the intention for GBH?


  There is no need to intend or be reckless about causing actual GBH or a wound.
• What was the outcome of DPP v Parmenter [1992] regarding the knowledge of risk?


  D was convicted of s47 ABH instead of s20 GBH due to lack of foresight of injury risk.
• What is the significance of the knowledge of HIV status in GBH cases?


  • D need not know they were causing GBH.
  • Recklessness regarding the risk of harm is sufficient.
• What is the case that established there is no need to intend or be reckless as to causing actual GBH under s20?


  R v Mowatt [1967]
• What did Lord Diplock state regarding the mens rea for s20 in R v Mowatt?


  It is enough that the accused foresaw some physical harm, even if minor.
• What was the outcome of DPP v Parmenter [1992] regarding the conviction of the defendant?


  His s20 GBH conviction was quashed.
• Why was D convicted of s47 ABH instead of s20 GBH in DPP v Parmenter?


  There was no evidence he intended or foresaw any risk of injury.
• In R v Adaye [2004], what was the defendant's knowledge regarding his HIV status?


  He did not conclusively know he was infected.
• What constitutes a 'wound' according to JCC v Eisenhower [1984]?


  A wound must break the continuity of the skin.
• What does GBH mean according to DPP v Smith [1981]?


  GBH means "really serious harm."
• What does the term 'inflict' mean in the context of s20?


  'Inflict' means to cause harm.
• What is the mens rea of s20?


  Intention or subjective recklessness in causing some harm.
• What distinguishes s18 from s20 in terms of mens rea?


  S18 requires intention to cause serious harm, while s20 does not.
• What is the maximum punishment for s18 OAPA 1861?


  Life imprisonment.
• What must the prosecution prove regarding intention in s18 OAPA 1861?


  The prosecution must prove the defendant intended to cause serious harm.
• What does the term 'malicious' imply in the context of s18 OAPA 1861?


  It implies that the defendant intended some harm or was reckless about causing harm.
• In Morrison [1989], what did the court determine about the meaning of 'maliciously'?


  'Maliciously' means the defendant intended some harm or realized there was a risk of harm.
• What are the elements of s20 GBH?


  • Actus Reus: Causing injury or harm
  • Mens Rea: Intention or subjective recklessness in causing some harm
• What are the elements of s18 OAPA 1861?


  • Actus Reus: Malicious wounding or causing GBH
  • Mens Rea: Intention to cause serious harm or to resist arrest