HMA V Sandra Dennie

Ms Dennie has had her appeal against conviction rejected at the appeal court. Ms Dennie pled not guilty but after Trial the jury found her guilty of assault to a woman’s severe injury and permanent disfigurement by repeatedly punching and kicking her on the head and body in early 2017.

The appellant claimed that the jury’s verdict was “perverse.”
The jury deleted the words: “and strike her head against a glass vivarium and repeatedly strike her on the body with glass” when finding the appellant guilty.

Therefore the appellant claimed the jury’s verdict was not to be relied on as by deleting the sentence meant that they did not accept that she attacked the appellant with glass. Therefore if this was the case the appellant argued that severe injury should be deleted and the conviction was not safe.

The crown argued this was an ongoing assault and the jury were entitled to find this the case. The appeal court agreed with this view. Lady Paton said: “In our opinion, if a person is assaulted, and as a result is physically forced against a surface or object made of glass which breaks or shatters, causing lacerations, the assailant is responsible for those injuries even if he did not actually strike the complainer with an object made of glass.

Similarly, if a person is assaulted, and as a result falls against or comes into contact with such a surface or object and suffers lacerations, the assailant is again responsible for these injuries.”