R v Ring
Attempts
Intention was to steal property. Placed hand in the pocket of the victim which was empty.
Attempted theft due to intent to steal property being present
Cameron v R
Recklessness is established if:
a) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
i) his or her actions would bring about the proscribed result; and /or
ii) that the proscribed circumstances existed;
and
b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable
Simester and Brookbanks - Knowledge
Knowledge means knowing or correctly believing.
Mere suspicion is not enough.
The belief must be correct, Where the belief is wrong a person cannot know something.
R v Collister
Intent can be inferred from the words and actions, said or made before, during or after the event, the surrounding circumstances and the nature of the act itself.
(Two Cops case law)
Applies to Intent
R v Tipple
Recklessness requires that the offender know of, or have a conscious appreciation of the relevant risk, and it may be said that it requires “a deliberate decision to run the risk”.
(Shooting target)
R v Cox (consent)
Consent must be full, free and informed. It must be freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form a rational judgement.
R v Cook
To be effective, consent must be “real, genuine or true consent, and that it may be conveyed by words or conduct or both”
R v Cox (Possession)
Two elements, mental and physical
Mental element - intention and knowledge
Physical element - Custody and control
R v Taisalika
The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.
Ruled intoxication/loss of memory not the same as lack of intent at the time.
R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken even if the possession by the thief is only momentarily
(Earring caught in her hair)
R v Peat
The immediate return of goods by the robber does not purge the offence.
(highway robbery, carriage. Gives silk purse to offender who hands it back and states give me the content)
R v Maihi
There must be a connection between the act of stealing and the threat of violence. Both must be present; however the term does not require that the act of stealing and the threat be made contemporaneously.
Peneha v Police
Sufficient that the defendants acts forcibly interfere with the personal freedom or a forcible powerful or violent action or motion.
R v Joyce
Crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time that the robbery was committed, or the assault occurred
R v Galey
Being together in the context of section 235b involves two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force, either in any event or as circumstances’ might require, directly in the perpetration of the crime.
R v Mitchell
Previously made threats on the victims mind assessed by fact and degree in each case.
(Mongrol mob member offering security for money. Threatened if he didn’t pay that he would hurt his family etc.)
R v Bentham
A persons body is not a weapon (ie hand under shirt intimidating a weapon/gun)
R v Waters
A wound is a ‘breaking of the skin evidenced by the flow of blood’. May be internal or external.
Application : wound
R v Rapana & Murray
Disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage
Application: disfigures
R v Mcarthur
‘Bodily Harm’ includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim. it need not be permanent but needs to be more than transitory and trifling
Applies to ‘Injures’
R v Wati
There must be proof of the commission or attempted commission of a crime either by the person committing the assault or by the person whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate
Applies to aggravated wounding
R v Sturm
To stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person which really seriously interferes with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder an intended crime
Applies to stupefy
R v Crossan
Incapable of resistance. Includes a powelessness of the will as well as physical incapacity.
Applies to “incapable of resistance”
R v Misic
Essentially a document is a thing which provides evidence or information or serves as a record
Applies to document
