Non-Fatals Evaluation

• It is over 150 years old.

• It doesn't mention mental health as it was not properly understood. (Burstow)

• There was a limited understanding on how diseases were transmitted. (R v Dica)

• Biological and psychaitric harm = case law

• Inconsistency regarding mens rea.

• S47 MR = Assault or battery MR

• This is unjust because a small cut can equal S20 instead of ABH because it breaks the epidermis and would be considered as wounding.

• Maximum sentence for S47 and S20 are the same even though their blameworthiness is much different.

• Is it right htat resisting the arrest but not foreseeing harm lowers the MR compared to someone that intended GBH on someone.

• Results D foresees = Result D gets.

• Can be guilty of S20 without intent or being reckless.
• Can be guilty of S47 without intent or being reckless.
• These both breach the correspondence pricviple.

• S20 uses 'malicious' which suggests deliberate. However S20 does not neccessarily mean with intent (Cunningham)

• S20 - 'inflict' Means that technical assault had to take place. (Burstow)
• House of Lords ruled it did not.

• S18- 'cause' sugests it was not neccessarily intended. 

This was intented to replace the hierachy of Non-Fatal Offences.

• Clause 1
• Intentional serious injury : where a person would be guilty if he intentionally caused serious harm to another.

• Clause 2
• Reckless serious injury : where a person would be guilty if he recklessly caused serious injury to another.

• Clause 3
• Intentional or reckless injury : where a person would be guilty if he intentionally or recklessly caused injury to another.

• Clause 4
• Assault : a person would be guilty if he intentionally or recklessly:
• applied force to or caused an imoact on the body of another.
• caused the other to believe that any such force or impact is imminent.

Set out recommendations.

• It should provide a clear hierachy of offences from the most serious to the least. The place of each offence in the hierachy should reflect:

• The harm caused.
• The culpability of the defendant.
• The maximum penalty should be in proportion.

• Each offence should provide a clear and accurate understanding for the label in conduct in question and should be defined in language that is easy to interpret.

• Each ingredient of an offence, whether an external element or a mental element, should be set out explicitly.