 " Wounding " and " causing grievous bodily harm " are defined in the same way as they are in the crime of maliciously wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm . Grievous bodily harm includes serious psychological trauma and serious infection ; however , these are less controversial here because of the inclusion of intent . Intent narrows the crime considerably , and the term " inflict " is not used . In form ( 3 ) , intent can be simply decided in the case of a direct attack , or " virtual certainty " , with knowledge of the virtual certainty – the Woollin principle . In form ( 1 ) , where an injury does not amount to grievous bodily harm , intent to cause grievous bodily harm ( in the advancement of a different cause ) must be shown . Practically , the " virtual certainty " clause cannot come into force , since grievous bodily harm was not actually caused , by definition . In forms ( 2 ) and ( 4 ) , the concept of " malice " has a role to play that it does not in ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) . The defendant must foresee the risk of wounding or grievous bodily harm , where the core intent is to resist arrest . The defendant cannot be reckless to the resisting of arrest , it must be an intention . Concerning the requirement to resist a lawful arrest , the defendant only lacks the required mens rea if he believes in facts which , if true , would make the arrest unlawful ; not just that he believes the facts as they are make the arrest illegal – a mistake of fact suffices , a mistake of law does not . 
