Poison

 

Count * Administering a poisonous or noxious substance so as to endanger life or inflict grievous bodily harm

 

Putting it very simply, the prosecution case is that D**

 

D** says **

 

 

You can see what the prosecution have to prove by looking at the wording under “Particulars of Offence” on the indictment.

 

I am going to break this down into five parts: 

 

 

unlawfully

 

That means without lawful justification or excuse.

 

 

maliciously

 

The prosecution have to prove that the defendant foresaw that, when he **, he foresaw that it might endanger **’s life or inflict grievous bodily harm. 

 

 

The prosecution say that anyone who ** must realise that life of C** would be endangered. D** admitted in cross examination that he knew what he was doing and that it was a dangerous and irrational thing to do.

 

 

administered to C**

 

The word “administer” is an ordinary English word.  It has no special legal meaning.  It includes any conduct which brings the poison or other destructive or noxious thing into contact with the victim’s body.  It might be that the most common ways in which a poison is administered is by injecting someone or putting it in food.  However, **  is, as a matter of law, capable of amounting to “administering” that noxious thing if it comes into contact with the victim’s body.

 

 

poison or other destructive or noxious thing

 

A “noxious thing” is any injurious, hurtful, harmful or unwholesome substance.

 

** is a poison or other destructive or noxious thing. 

 

 

so as thereby to endanger the life of C** or inflict grievous bodily harm

 

Grievous bodily harm means “really serious harm”

 

The issue is whether or not it endangered her life or caused really serious harm.

 

. 

 

There is no requirement that the defendant intended to endanger her life or inflict really serious harm.

 

 

If, as he admits it, the D** did **, the other key question for you to decide is whether  ** did endanger her life, whether through poisoning or through the risk of an explosion or cause her really serious harm..

 

.

 

The prosecution rely upon the evidence of **.

 

 

If you are not sure that her life was endangered or she was caused really serious harm, there is an alternative lesser offence – count *.

 

 

Count * - Administering a poisonous or noxious substance with intent to injure, aggrieve or annoy

 

The first four parts of this offence are the same as Count *

 

unlawfully

 

maliciously

 

administered to C**

 

poison or other destructive or noxious thing

 

 

The difference is the fifth part.  The prosecution do not have to prove that **  endangered C**’s life or inflicted grievous bodily harm – only that the defendant

 

Intended to injure, aggrieve or annoy her

 

These are ordinary English words.

 

You can only decide what the defendant's intention was by considering all the relevant circumstances and in particular what he did and what he said about it.

 

 

As Count * is an alternative, you cannot find the defendant guilty of both Count * and Count *

 

 

So, the key questions for you to answer in relation to Count * and Count *, having regard to all the evidence and the directions which I give you, are these

 

 

Did ** endanger C**s life or cause her really serious harm?

 

When he **, did he foresee that it might endanger C**’s life or cause her really serious harm? 

 

 

If you are sure that the answers to both those questions are “yes”, the defendant is guilty of Count *.  If the answer to either question may be “no”, he is not guilty of Count * but you should consider the following question in relation to Count *.  (You do not have to consider this next question if you have found D** guilty of Count *.)

 

 

At the time when he turned on the gas, did D** intend to injure, aggrieve or annoy C**?

 

 

If you are sure that the answer is “yes”, the defendant is guilty of Count *.  If the answer may be “no”, he is not guilty of Count *.

 

 

back to home  back to criminal law