A trial judge is not required to direct on the defence of accident under s 23(1)(b) of the Criminal Code (Qld) where the evidence, including video footage showing the accused overpowering the victim and applying force, and the accused's own words indicating intent, does not raise the possibility that neither the accused nor an ordinary person could reasonably have foreseen the type of wounding inflicted. Two impacts with a window occurring approximately six seconds apart while the accused maintained physical contact with the victim constitute 'one activity' for the purposes of latent duplicity.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.