s20 eval

• pro - case law meets the shortfalls of statute - GBH was developed to included biological harm and psychological harm
• pro - actus reus of GBH recognises the age and health of the victim and that it needs to be considered when deciding what sentence to give
• con - no statutory definition for grievous or bodily - set out in case law which leads to inconsistent outcomes
• con - inflict in s20 and cause in s18 mean the same thing but that word can lead to a different outcome and a harsher sentence
• con - there are sentencing issues - 5 years for s20 which is same as s47 - but up to life for s18 - not clear
• con - wounding is not defined so unclear - must break two or more layers which can be broken by a pin pricking the v's finger - would be guilty of s20??
• reforms - LC 2015 said - D is to be guilty if recklessly causes serious injury - has to be a risk of SERIOUS INJURY