When assessing the nature of the injury (injuries) the jury is to take into account all factors and whether the injury (injuries) amount to GBH or otherwise is to be determined by taking into account ordinary standards of usage and experience and this direction is in line with Section 8 of the Criminal Justice Act (1967).
In R v Brown and Stratton (1997) the defendant and his cousin were embarrassed by the defendant’s father who was undergoing a gender reassignment and turned up at the defendant’s workplace wearing a dress. Both the defendant and his cousin after a drinking bout, went over to the where the defendant’s father was staying, and assaulted her inflicting numerous injuries including a broken nose, a concussion and knocked out several teeth. The defendants pleaded guilty to causing actual bodily harm as per S. 47 of the Offences Against Persons Act (1861) and not grievous bodily harm (GBH) as per S. 18 of the Offences Against Person Act (1861).
The trial judge directed the jury to consider the injuries from the perspective of the victim and if the victim would consider the injuries that she’d sustained as serious and the defendants were accordingly convicted for causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) under s18 of the Offences Against Persons Act (1861). The defendants appealed.
It was held that while there was a mis-direction (the direction to the jury), it did not by itself render the conviction unsound. Taking into account the fact that the defendants were intoxicated at the time the s.18 conviction was substituted for a s.20 conviction of the same act.
Copyright © 2018 by Dyarne Ward