... gashed head. This however would be a question for the jury to decide. The mens rea of such a defence requires that the act be done 'maliciously' and with 'intent'. It is likely that Charles would fall under section 183 rather than section 20 of the act, which does not require intent. One could argue that by smashing a bottle over someone's head, harm was indeed intended. With such a case, it is first important that to note that the harm was not actually directed at Bessie but Albert. Nevertheless due to the common law principle of Transferred Malice, it is apparent that if the intent to harm Albert is found, and the act occurred i.e. Bessie's injuries, both elements would have been formed, and so create a whole offence. This was the case in Latimer4 whereby the defendants intentions to swing a belt at a man, but who ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now