In a prosecution for malicious wounding under s 35(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), where the Crown relies on recklessness, the trial judge must explain the concept of recklessness to the jury — it is not sufficient merely to read the s 5 definition of 'maliciously' or provide a copy of it. The jury must be directed that recklessness requires a realisation by the accused of the possibility that some physical harm might result, yet the accused went ahead and acted. Where the defence case raises the issue of the accused not foreseeing the consequences of his act, such a direction is essential.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.