...Criminal Case Case: R v Gittany Facts: Lisa Cecilia Harnum’s body fell from her shared high-rise apartment in the Sydney CBD minutes after trying to leave her abusive fiancé Simon Gittany. Gittany has had a dark past being associated with violence, drugs, having an uncontrollable temper and committing several criminal offences which included biting off parts of a policemen’s ear and selling cocaine. Gittany claims Harnum either slipped or deliberately fell to her death. Gittany had ‘bugged’ Harnum’s cell phone reading all her text messages and emails as well as listening to all her calls. When he discovered his fiancé was seeing a councillor he physically threatened her that if she saw his fiancé again he will “harm [her].” The day of Harnum’s death she had planned to flee to Canada to get away from her abusive fiancé and to be with her parents. As she left her apartment to go to the airport he was seen on CCTV with his hand over her mouth and pushing her back into the apartment. Harnum was seen very distressed as she tried to run away from Gittany. Neighbours then heard Harnum pleading “help! Help! Somebody help me! God help me!” 69 seconds later she fell to her death. Judgements: Judge Lisa McCallum declared Simon Gittany to be guilty and sentenced him to a minimum of 18 years imprisonment. The court charged Gittany with premeditated murder. Why?: McCallum made this judgement in court as sufficient evidence found that Gittany planned on killing Harnum on several occasions yet...
Words: 1024 - Pages: 5
...Section 320 IPC – An Appraisal Dr. Dasari Harish, Prof & Head; Dr. K H Chavali, Assoc. prof; Dr. Amandeep Singh & Dr. Ajay Kr, Asst. Profs Dept. Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, Government Medical College & Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh – 160030 Correspondence: dasariharish@gmail.com Abstract: S. 320 defines grievous hurt and lists eight kinds of hurt which it lables as “grievous”. These clauses are not mutually exclusive, for there can be injuries which may fall in more than one clause. However, the list is exhaustive in the sense that, the framers of the Code have used the term “only”, while listing the type of hurts which they designated as “grievous”. To make out the offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt, there must be a specific hurt, voluntarily inflicted, and coming within any of the eight kinds enumerated in this section. A simple hurt cannot be designated as grievous simply because it was on a vital part of the body, unless the dimensions or the nature of the injury or its effects are such that it actually endangers life. In the backdrop of the verdicts by the Hon’ble courts wherein it was held that the extent of the hurt and the intention of offender should be considered to determine whether a given hurt is grievous, an attempt is made in this article to review the Section with a view to put forward certain fallacies. These, need to be addressed to, in tune with the changing times and in accordance with the modern trends of treatment...
Words: 5053 - Pages: 21
...3. Whether the charge of murder of Mr. Vijay Satyavadi on the MLA’s is valid? On 3rd Jan Mr. Satyavadi was spotted in the visitors’ gallery of the assembly by Mr.Goga Bhai and brought to the notice of the Speaker that Mr. Satyavadi made an obscene gesture looking at him and 3 other MLA’s sitting beside him. Later, on the same day Mr.Goga Bhai and the other 3 MLA’s saw Mr. Satyavadi outside the visitor’s gallery in uniform on security duty. Mr.Satyvadi tried to move his right hand towards his service revolver by the sight of the 4 MLA’s. However, all my clients were completely unarmed and due to the earlier events the same day, which had also been brought to the notice of the speaker Mr.Goga Bhai and the other MLA’s were already under threat because of the gestures made by the defendant earlier that day. Later when they saw Mr. Satyavadi outside the visitors’ gallery they felt threatened by the threatening gesture of Mr.Satyavadi’s, as he moved his hand towards his service revolver .In an act of Private defense my clients caught hold of Mr. Satyavadi and beat him up, since there was no immediate help from any security personal’s would be possible within the given short time frame. Only necessary amount of physical force was used to knock Mr. Satyavadi unconscious, which was an obvious reaction from a sane human and the same would be done by any man in a life threatening situation like this. RIGHT TO PRIVATE DEFENCE (Indian Penal Code 1860) Section 100 When the right of...
Words: 815 - Pages: 4
...Unit 1- Introduction to Business Ethics Unit 1– Individual Project American Intercontinental University BUSN 310-1102B-03 Electronic Business Instructor June Cohen 06/06/2011 Abstract When a product is broken or not in working order, it can be irrationally hazardous to the consumer, when it has a inclination or a weakness to cause bodily harm beyond the contemplated by regular user. With the problem arises of a broken or not working product, the legal agent is a abrasion if it is the shortest route and in the natural form and unending sequence produces or donate substantially to generate such injury. (La Mance, Ken 1999-2011) With petition involving allegation of a broken or not in a working condition, irrationally hazardous products, the corporations or companies may be accountable even though the individual may locate it repeatedly for all acceptable care in the design manufacture and sale of the product in question. (La Mance, Ken 1999-2011) When an individual, homeowner, apartment managers, online shopping etc need to find a qualify contractor visit Angie List. This website has a lot of creditable, honest and it back up with Angie. All the date of website is all certified, they have complaint resolution team. (Angie List, 2009) A defective product can be broken or not in a working order. The defective product can have lead paint on it. A defective product can range from VCR, CD Player, Stereo, Refrigerator, Stove, Microwave, etc. A defective...
Words: 386 - Pages: 2
...1. What type of homicide is featured in this case? (Note: Be as specific as possible) [4 marks] Type of homicide is domestic homicide or intimate partner homicide. What are the main characteristics of the offender (eg. age, ethnicity, occupation, previous criminal history, previous victimisation, health-related issues, family history)? [15 marks] Offender had a previous criminal history of violence towards police. Attacked a policeman when he was arrested previously biting his ear and causing the officer grievous bodily harm. “Mr Gittnay was a jealous and possessive partner. Ms Harnum was being subjected to a degree of scrutiny and direction from him that was overbearing.” ( R v Gittany (No 5) [2014] NSWSC 49 (11 February 2014)para 6.). “Whilst Mr Gittany was undoubtedly caring and attentive towards Ms Harnum in some ways, he sought throughout their relationship to deprive her of any real autonomy. He scrutinised her conduct both openly and covertly, keeping track of her movements with surveillance cameras installed in their unit and secretly monitoring her mobile telephone with spying software he had installed without her knowledge.”( R v Gittany (No 5) [2014] NSWSC 49 (11 February 2014)para 7). “I do not think there can be any doubt that the accused was controlling, dominating and at times abusive. The force of his jealous and controlling personality met mixed resistance from Lisa Harnum, who was at times defiant, at times submissive to an inexplicable degree. I am satisfied...
Words: 525 - Pages: 3
...Rea to actually hit Joe sense he actually hit his dog instead. When Sam hit Joe’s dog it made Joe become very emotionally distressed, which is the tort of infliction of emotional distress. Joe committed assault and battery when he broke Sam’s nose. Since Sam hit his dog, he could say that he was protecting his family. There are probably a few juries that allow protecting your pet a family member also, since Joe was emotional distressed. There could be money damages taken out for that too. I believe this is a good way of self defense to the battery. According to CNN’s law table from 2012, you are justified in using deadly force, with no duty to retreat, when you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another or...
Words: 569 - Pages: 3
...Murder assignment Offence The offence in question is murder, stated in the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) s 11 that any person who commits murder shall be guilty of an offence and shall be imprisoned for life . Conduct elements Conduct Element (Actus Rea) Voluntariness Voluntariness of the accused is the fundamental element that forms the Actus Rea of a crime. In order to determine whether A was in control of his physical actions, the death-causing Act must be recognised. As shown in Ryan v R the death causing action can consist of multiple acts . There was a series of death causing acts in this case – the relevant acts performed by A are the initial arrow wound to the shoulder and then the main death-causing act (according to medical evidence) the head collision with the concrete curb. My opinion is that of all the actions together showed the voluntariness was the “complex of acts” all performed by the accused. I do not have enough information relating to A’s sobriety however it does not indicate that he was under the influence of any alcohol or drugs. In this situation the defence would be arguing his actions were a response of automatism. Due to the fact that A claimed in the police statement that ‘when pulling back the bowstring I lost my balance, the dirt just gave out and I slipped and in doing so reached out reflexively to brace the fall. To rebut I would be more incline to follow the judgment of Murry v R, similar to this case the defendant fully...
Words: 1124 - Pages: 5
...motivating his actions however this is irrelevant to his actions in law. P intentionally: Venna imposed unlawful force: Collins v Wilcock on Rose (R) by pulling her hair. R did not give P permission to assault her, therefore the contact was both physical: Ireland and unlawful. Previous case law has clarified unlawful force to be even the slightest touch R v Brown . The mens rea for this offence is satisfied by either intention or subjective recklessness. With reference to the problem question, the actus reus was the direct physical contact of P with R when he pulls her hair, but it is clear there was no harm done to R’s body. Pablo and Rose – Cutting hair. Secondly, when P severs R’s hair this could constitute an offence of Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) contrary to section 47 (s.47) OAP Act 1861. Unlike battery, this is a triable either way offence meaning it can be heard in either a magistrates or crown court carrying a maximum...
Words: 1741 - Pages: 7
...Revision Theories of Punishment and Criminalisation • These should be reviewed in order to help answer essay type questions. For example • “What point does causation play in criminal liability”? • Would require an explanation of why it is appropriate to punish someone for what they achieve (eg killing someone) rather than what they set out to achieve (eg beating someone up). The theory of retribution helps here – punishment according to one’s desert which must take into account not only the fact that one has acted wrongfully but also the consequences which ensue. Gerneral Principles of Criminal Liability Liability depends upon • Wrongdoing (actus reus) • Culpability (mens rea) • Absence of any defence General Principles (con) • Key Points • Actus Reus – usually liability requires proof of some act. You must identify that act. Without it there may be no liability however blameworthy the person is. General Principles (con) • Sometimes liability may be based upon an omission to act – 1. Statutory crimes of omission eg failing to wear a seat belt. – 2. Liability for result crimes (eg murder, manslaughter, s.18 OAPA) may be engaged for an omission but only if there is a duty to act. Omissions (con) • Essay Questions • Eg Should there be a general duty to act? 1. Requires statement of the general principle (act needed) 2. Requires discussion of reasons for and against eg promoting good community values, contra autonomy, certainty etc. YOU MUST READ YOUR...
Words: 1418 - Pages: 6
...cause GBH ‘serious’ or wound. In the case of Ahmed “deliberately” swinging his stick to hit Bob in the face, cutting his lip could mean Ahmed satisfies section 20 as the cut in Bobs lip is a break in the skin. The mens rea of a section 20 offence is to intend or recklessness as to some harm. As the act was deliberate, it could be argued that Ahmed intended to cause harm which possibly could change his offence to a section 18. Section 18 this is considered a much more serious offence than Section 20, as can be seen from the differences in the maximum punishments. Section 20 has a maximum of 5 years imprisonment whereas the maximum for a section 18 is life imprisonment. The mens rea for this offence is the specific intent to cause grievous bodily harm or to resist arrest. However, this would be left up to the jury to decide. Ahmed could not use defence of consent as such conduct is outside the rules of the game. The Court of Appeal said in Barnes that where an injury is caused during a...
Words: 527 - Pages: 3
...Discuss the potential criminal liability of Jonty and Patrick for the non-fatal offences against the person, including any relevant defences (50 marks) Jonty is likely to liable for an s20 or s18 offence under the Offences against the Persons Act 1861. S20 is the malicious wounding or inflicting GBH with intention or subjective recklessness as to causing some harm, which carries a maximum sentence of five years. This is the same maximum sentence as an s47 offence which can be seen as a problematic area in the law which is in need of reform. Jonty’s act of hitting Patrick hard across the back of his head satisfies the actus reus for wounding. As defined in JCC v Eisenhower (1983), wounding is ‘a cut or break in the continuity of the whole skin’, and held that a cut must be of the whole skin and a scratch is not considered as a wound. However, Saunders (1985) overruled the definition of GBH from DPP v Smith (1961), where the definition went from ‘really serious harm’ to ‘serious harm’. Jonty clearly had wounded Patrick, and although not life threatening Patricks injuries can still amount to GBH, and it is only needed to show that his actions led to the consequences of V’s GBH. This was ruled in Burstow (1997) where ‘inflict’ didn’t require a technical assault or battery. Jonty may be liable for s 39 of Criminal Justice Act 1988 for battery. Battery is the application of unlawful force or violence with intention or subjective recklessness to applying the unlawful force. This...
Words: 613 - Pages: 3
...Question 1- George Hewkin For Lucy, Jon would be liable for s.47. To find liability we must first establish the actus reus. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The assault refers to common assault so either assault or battery. In this case it’s an assault. Jon made Lucy fear immediate and unlawful (Lamb) violence. There is no need for any physical contact. The cases of Ireland and Burstow confirm that silence can amount to an assault. It’s also clear she feared unlawful violence (Logdon) as she ran off crying. The second part of the definition is occasioning, did Jon’s actions cause the harm. There are no intervening acts so its clear his actions where the operating and substantial cause. The final part of the actus reus Is the harm caused by Jon’s battery actual bodily harm. Miller defines ABH as ‘more than minimal harm’. Chan-fook established mental harm as a form of ABH. As she couldn’t go out for months after, I believe this is more than minimal harm. Actus reus established. Next the mens rea must be proven. Intention or recklessness as to causing the initial assault or battery. Savage confirms the mens rea for s.47. In this case I believe Jon had intention, it was a clear action that’s not a natural reflex or anything of that nature. It’s completely voluntary therefore it was his choice to carry it out. Liability can be established, Jon would be charged with s.47, which carries a sentence of up to 5 years imprisonment. For Malik, Jon would be liable for battery...
Words: 742 - Pages: 3
...Extreme sumarization of r v brown( key point of arguments used by the five judges) Question certified by COA "Where A wounds or assaults B occasioning him actual bodily harm in the course of a sado-masochistic encounter, does the prosecution have to prove lack of consent on the part of B before they can - 1 - establish A's guilt under section 20 and section 47 of the 1861, Offences Against the Person Act?" Lord templement In Reg. v. Coney (1882) Cave J "The true view is, I think, that a blow struck in anger, or which is likely or is intended to do corporal hurt, is an assault, but that a blow struck in sport, and not likely nor intended to cause bodily harm, is not an assault, and that an assault being a breach of the peace and unlawful, the consent of the person struck is immaterial." Stephen J "When one person is indicted for inflicting personal injury upon another, the consent of the person who sustains the injury is no defence to the person who inflicts the injury, if the injury is of such a nature, or is inflicted under such circumstances, that its infliction is injurious to the public as well as to the person injured. But the injuries given and received in prize-fights are injurious to the public, both because it is against the public interest that the lives and the health of the combatants should be endangered by blows, and because prize-fights are disorderly exhibitions, mischievous on many obvious grounds. Therefore the consent of the parties...
Words: 8011 - Pages: 33
...Classification: Victim of an assault ICR: Assault Reported by: Sa Ba Taw DOB: 8/20/1991 Address: 2316, Gne Ave 2361 City: Albert Lea State: MN Zip: 56007 Phone: 651-307-2531 Work Phone: Victim: Sa Ba Taw DOB:8/20/1991 Address: 2316, Gne Ave 2361 City: Albert Lea State: MN Zip: 56007 Phone: 651-307-2531 Work Phone: Suspect: Unknown DOB: Unknown Address: Unknown City: Unknown State: Unknown: Zip: Unknown Phone: Unknown Date Reported: 04/23/2014 Day: Wednesday Time: 1245 Date Committed: 04/23/2014 Time Committed: 1100 Incident Location: Albert Lea Wal-Mart LGN: N/A Badge: N/A Date: 04/ 23/2014 Time Assigned: 1245 Time Arrived: 1445 Date: 04/ 23/2014: Narrative On 04-23-2014 at approximately 1245 I, uniformed (officer) Fatbardh Emra was dispatch to a call in regards of an assault that occurred in Wal-Mart- Supermarket in 1550 Blake Ave. Albert Lea MN, 56007. Upon arrival I, uniformed (officer) Emra spoke to the victim Sa Ba Taw, and saw visible injuries to him. Victim stated that inside of the supermarket Wal-Mart...
Words: 579 - Pages: 3
...for watching video? Can you identify any shortcomings of the device? 2. Compare the capabilities of the Kindle to the iPad. Which is a better device for reading books? Explain your answer. 3. Would you like to use an iPad or Kindle for the books you use in your college courses or read for pleasure instead of traditional print publications? Why or why not? II Porter’s competitive forces model helps companies develop competitive strategies using information systems. In this context answer the following questions: 1. Define Porter’s competitive forces model and explain how it works. 2. Describe what the competitive forces model explains about competitive advantage. 3. List and describe four competitive strategies enabled by information systems that firms can pursue. 4. Describe how information systems can support each of these competitive strategies and give examples. 5. Explain why aligning IT with business objectives is essential for strategic use of systems. III Discussion Questions 1. It has been said that there is no such thing as a sustainable competitive advantage. Do you agree? Why or why not? 2. It has been said that the advantage that leading-edge retailers such as Dell and Wal-Mart have over their competition isn’t technology; it’s their management. Do you agree? Why or why not? 3. What are some of the issues to consider in determining whether the Internet would provide your business with a...
Words: 296 - Pages: 2