Principles of Criminal Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Principles of Criminal Law - Essay ExampleThe penalisation is the same heretofore whether the offender used a weapon against the victim or not. However for the accused person to be liable for such offences, wounding must have overstepred. This doer that a discontinuity of the skin must occur on the body of the victim, and at least a drop of blood must collide with away the body of the victim (Cross, 1995). It is worth noting that under section 47 of the act, embodied distress, or wounding whitethorn occur to a person without directly or indirectly applying fleshly violence to the victim (MacDonald, 1948). The summation of the law in such a case is whether the victim would find such acts perpetrated against them either hellish or harmful. The law requires that it is enough for the accused to have foreseen that physical harm to some person faculty result. In our case, Mr. Steven Roberts committed two acts that resulted to bodily harm and physical injuries to two victims, n amely his girl booster shot and the alleged man whom the girlfriend was cheating with against Mr. Steven. However, the substance of the law in the two discovers of this case atomic number 18 different, in that, in the first account, Mr. Steven had no intention of inflicting any bodily injury or physical harm to his girlfriend. He only meant to surprise her, an act that accidentally resulted to the girlfriend falling from the staircase and organism injured. However, on the consequence account, Mr. Steven shoved off the man accompanying his girlfriend to make him move out of the way. In so doing, he ended up inflicting physical harm on the man, through banging him against a glass door that injured him. It place therefore, be found that while in the first account Mr. Steven did not have the intention to harm, in the second account, he ought to have foreseen that physical harm superpower result to the man he shoved off (Smith, 2008). This therefore makes the two accounts different in the substance of the law, something that means the accused can be liable for the accounts differently. If not found guilty for the first account, it is likely that the second account would make him liable. Thus, it is worth treating the two accounts separately in the attempt to seek legal excuse for the case against Mr. Steven (MacDonald, 1975). The first account of Mr. Steven causing bodily harm against her girl friend appears defined indoors the confinement of section 47 of the 1861 act (Milton, 1996). The first account is admissible under the laws pertaining to common fill out, whose punishment is the payment of a recommended fine or an imprisonment not exceeding six months or both. on that point is a defense available for Mr. Steven against the first account (Smith, 2005). Consent is applicable as one of the defense, where it requires that if the harm caused is not so severe, and there is a recognizable good reason for the offence, then the accused can be relieved of the criminal liability (Greaves, 2006). Since Mr. Stevens intention was not to harm his girlfriend, then if the injury happens not to be severe, then he can be relieved the criminal responsibility to assault (Smith, 1998). In the second account, Mr. Steven charge is under section 18 of the 1861 act because he caused wounding and bodily harm to the man accompanying his girlfriend (Glanville, 1983). The proof that wounding was caused is the fact that there was a fall of blood from the body of the victim. The prosecution will be able to prove