New Zealand Law/Criminal/Assault

Wounding with Intent
A person is guilty of the offence who: (a) with intent to cause gbh – maims, disfigures or causes gbh (b) with intent to injure – maims, disfigures or causes gbh. maim: to cause a person to be unable to uses one of his members

Injury with Intent
A person is guilty of the offence who: (a) with intent to cause gbh – injures anyone (b) with intent to injure – injures anyone

Injury by Unlawful Act
Injuring where if death had occurred it would have been manslaughter.

Aggravated Wounding/Injury
A person is guilty of the offence who with intent to:
 * (a) commit a crime;
 * (b) avoid arrest;
 * (c) avoid detection; or
 * (d) facilitate flight
 * either:
 * (i) wounds, maims, disfigures, causes gbh, stupefies, renders unconscious, renders incapable of offering resistence; or
 * (ii) injures anyone.

maim: to cause a person to be unable to use one of his members.

Aggravated Assault
A person is guilty of the offence who either: (a) assault with intent to commit a crime (b) obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty.

Assault with Intent to Injure
A person is guilty of the offence who with intent to injure, assaults anyone.

R v Kerr

 * Facts
 * The defendant, a gang member, went looking for a rival gang member.
 * The victim attacked the defendant with a pipe.
 * The defendant pulled out a knife, stabbed and killed the victim; the defendant was subsequently charged with murder.


 * Held
 * 1) Judge should leave defence to jury unless it is impossible for jury to entertain reasonable doubt.
 * 2) Quoting Palmer
 * - a person under attack cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of necessary defensive action;
 * - if a person did what he honestly and instinctively considered necessary, it is pretty powerful evidence that it was reasonable defensive action.

R v Nazif

 * Question
 * Can a person consent to assault?


 * Held
 * 1) Common law defence saved by s 20 Crimes Act except where not in the public interest.
 * 2) Honest belief in consent sufficient (unless otherwise provided in statute).
 * 3) Belief need not be reasonable but goes to whether belief actually held.

R v Mwai

 * Facts
 * M had unprotected sex with several women after becoming HIV positive. Charged with causing gbh.


 * Held
 * 1) Not necessary for act to be the sole cause, enough that is a sufficient cause.
 * 2) Virus and women’s immune system were causes, but def was a substantial cause.

Lazarus v Police

 * Facts:
 * Defendant broke window of a car with a golf club. Some of the glass struck an occupant.


 * Held:


 * It is only assault if the defendant;
 * (i) intended to apply force to someone; or
 * (ii) intended someone to feel personally threatened.

cf Kerr – where it was held that there can be a threat even if the victim is unaware.