Rex vs Shaun Nicholas Integrity

This case involved an appeal against a conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm within a military context, examining the nuances of self-defence and reasonable force.

TLDR:

• Shaun Nicholas Integrity was convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
• The incident occurred during a barbecue at the barracks.
• The appeal focused on the legal direction given regarding self-defence and reasonable force.
• The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction.

On 14 July 2022, a barbecue was held at the barracks where the applicant, Shaun Nicholas Integrity, resided. Around 10:00 pm, the complainant, Craftsman Young, and two others were sitting outside the accommodation block. After throwing a sausage into the applicant's room, the applicant came outside and punched Young in the face, resulting in multiple fractures to Young's cheekbone.

The prosecution argued that the applicant had unlawfully and without provocation punched the complainant, whereas the applicant claimed he acted in self-defence, feeling threatened by Young's actions and the presence of the other two men. The court martial convicted the applicant of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and sentenced him to 90 days' service detention, reduced him in rank, and imposed a compensation order.

The applicant sought to appeal the conviction, arguing that the Deputy Judge Advocate's direction to the Board on self-defence was incorrect, particularly regarding the reasonableness of the force used. The applicant's counsel contended that the prosecution did not argue that the force used was excessive, only that it was an unlawful attack.

The Court of Appeal considered the arguments and found that there was no agreement between the prosecution and defence that the force used was reasonable if used in self-defence. The court noted that the issue of reasonable force was addressed during the trial, and the applicant's counsel did not object to the proposed directions.

The court concluded that the Deputy Judge Advocate's direction was appropriate and that the conviction was not rendered unsafe by the inclusion of the reasonableness of the force used. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction.

Legal representatives: Mr. M Levy for the applicant, Ms. L Jones for the Service Prosecuting Authority.

Judicial Panel: Lady Justice Macur, Mr. Justice Jay, Mrs. Justice Foster.

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EWCA Crim 620