A local trial brings this question to mind. There was a local man charged with murdering a man and attempting to murder the wife in a botched robbery in 2003. Two victims. One murder. One attempted murder. One robbery.
However, there were 10 counts charged against him.
[ul]
[li]Five counts of aggravated murder. [/li][li]Three counts of attempted aggravated murder. [/li][li]Two counts of first-degree robbery.[/li][/ul]
He was found guilty on all 10 charges. If there was only 1 murder victim, 1 attempted murder victim and 1 robbery, how can they charge the guy, and find him guilty with all those charges?
Possibly the charges were based on different theories of the crime.
For conviction and sentencing purposes, the five murder counts will merge into one. Ditto with the attempted murder, and most likely the robbery as well.
It will depend very much on the actual facts in the case and the statutory definitions of the various offences in the jurisdiction e.g. how “aggravation” is defined. A quick look at the Crimes Act 1900 (our local legislation in NSW) suggests that “aggravation” can include actual harm, or threats of harm, before, during and after the commission of the offence. It probably wouldn’t be too hard to rack up multiple instances during the scenario that you’ve described.
Are you saying that in NSW, if I barge into a store and hit someone with my fists twice, and a baseball bat once, in order to convince them to hand over the cash, that each punch and hit is a seperate offense for conviction and sentencing purposes?