Standish v The Queen

In the case of Standish v The Queen, the appellant James Edward Cobden Standish appealed against his conviction for wounding Mr Williams, who intervened to prevent Standish from attacking his wife. The Court of Criminal Appeal was tasked with determining whether the trial judge erred in failing to direct the jury to consider Standish's state of intoxication in assessing his knowledge of the potential for others to intervene. The appellant argued that intoxication could be relevant in determining whether he was aware of the presence of others who might intervene. However, the court found that the trial judge's direction was correct, and that the appellant's state of intoxication did not affect his awareness of the potential for intervention. Furthermore, the court found that the appellant's conviction was correct under s13(3) of the Criminal Code, which deals with cases where an individual intends to commit an offence but causes an unforeseen result. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, and the conviction upheld.