All the right words, but not neccesarily in the right order.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Sending an offender down under? Ashes 2017-18
Collapse
X
-
The difficulty with an ABH (I don't think anyone sustained an injury that constitutes grievous) in a mass brawl is that it's often near impossible to ascertain who caused a particular injury. For instance in this trial the defence suggested it could have been Hales who caused some of the injuries.
Comment
-
The CPS did try to append a charge of ABH at the very last minute on the first day of the trial but the judge ruled it out as Stokes’ defence could not have prepared for it.Last edited by Ray de Galles; 15-08-2018, 07:30.
Comment
-
It's borderline - I'm quoting from a solicitors website as it specifically mentions a fractured eye socket.
What is Grievous Bodily Harm? (GBH)
Inflicting grievous bodily harm to another person is the most serious form of assault. The offence of GBH can be committed in two ways:
It can be intentionally inflicted, which is typically where the accused person is alleged to have intended to cause grievous levels of injury. This type of intentional wounding is contrary to Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA) and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Individuals convicted of a Section 18 offence of wounding with intent will often receive lengthy prison sentences, often with significant restrictions on their freedom when they are released
It is also possible to commit GBH recklessly. In this instance, while still serious, the case is treated differently. GBH committed recklessly is contrary to Section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA). A person convicted of this type of assault would be someone that didn’t intend to inflict a serious injury but did so nonetheless.
GBH, whether contrary to s.18 or s.20 OAPA, is the most serious because, in most cases, a victim of GBH is left with serious injuries, which can sometimes be life changing. They could also be left with long term injuries or scarring.
Severe injuries are deemed to cause serious detriment to a victim’s health, whether:
What acts and injuries constitute GBH?
Physically through wounding
Biologically through the transmission of disease
Psychologically if fear or paranoia are caused by the incident
If violence is inflicted with a weapon or the equivalent of a weapon, then the act is likely to be classified as inflicting grievous bodily harm intentionally (section 18).
Weapon equivalents are objects, items or parts of the body that are not themselves weapons but can be a weapon when used intentionally, such as:
The use of shod feet (kicking or stomping whilst wearing shoes)
Headbutting
The use of acid as a weapon
The use of an animal as a weapon
It is possible to inflict GBH with one strike or punch, however the more sustained, ferocious or prolonged the incident, the more likely it is to be viewed that the consequences were intended.
Weapon usage can also change the dynamics of a case. For example, if an accused person were to strike a victim to the face once with a punch which resulted in a fractured eye socket, it could be viewed that the serious injury was not intended. On the other hand, if a knuckle duster was used, the fracturing of the eye socket would be more likely to be considered intentional.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Janik View PostAre you sure of that, ad hoc? One of the guys Stokes and Hales hit was left with a fractured eye socket. Isn't grevious more like permanent injuries?
Though my assumptions about how the legal system works should be taken with barrowloads of salt
Comment
-
Back in the England team now, which doesn't sit too easily for lots of reasons.
To take the cricketing one, Sam Curran is desperately unlucky. Without his 60-odd at Edgbaston, Stokes would almost certainly not have been in the position to 'win the match for England' on that fourth morning. I'd rather have Curran's bowling than Stokes's at the moment, and his left-arm bowling gives an interesting variation.
Comment
Comment