Section 20 OAPA Scenario Analysis
This page provides a detailed analysis of a potential Section 20 assault scenario under the Offences against the Person Act 1861. The analysis covers the key elements required to establish criminal liability for intentionally or recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm GBH.
The analysis begins by examining the actus reus guiltyact of the offense. For Section 20, this can be either unlawful wounding or inflicting GBH.
Definition: Unlawful wounding is defined as a "break in the continuity of the skin" JCCvEisenhower, while GBH is defined as "really serious harm" DPPvSmith.
The scenario presented appears to satisfy the actus reus requirement, though specific details are not provided in the transcript.
Next, the analysis explores the concept of causation, which is crucial in establishing criminal liability.
Highlight: Causation is divided into two parts: factual causation and legal causation.
Factual causation is determined using the "but for" test, as established in cases like R v White and R v Pagett. This test asks whether the criminal consequence would have occurred "but for" the defendant's actions. Legal causation, on the other hand, uses the "more than minimal cause" test RvHughes, which requires the defendant's action to be a significant cause of the consequence.
The mens rea guiltymind element of Section 20 is then discussed.
Vocabulary: Mens rea for Section 20 GBH can be either intention or subjective recklessness to cause "some harm" to the victim.
This principle was established in R v Mowatt and confirmed in R v Savage & Parmenter. The analysis explains that intention can be either direct or indirect, with indirect intention occurring when the criminal consequence was virtually certain to result from the defendant's actions, both objectively and subjectively RvWoolin.
The scenario suggests that indirect intention to cause "some harm" would likely satisfy the mens rea requirement, as it would be virtually certain that harm would result from the defendant's actions.
Example: If a defendant throws a heavy object at a victim, it would be virtually certain that some harm would occur, potentially satisfying the indirect intention requirement for Section 20 GBH.
In conclusion, the analysis determines that the defendant in the scenario is likely to be criminally liable under Section 20 OAPA for the injuries to the victim, as all elements of actus reus and mens rea appear to be satisfied based on the information provided.
