Assault

Question 1

r v lamb

Answer 1

boys playing w a gun. didn’t know it was loaded. one pointed the gun in vs face and killed him. there was no assault as there was no fear

Question 2

point of law for r v lamb

Answer 2

no fear = no assault

Question 3

r v misalati

Answer 3

d racially and verbally abused staff at a job centre. evidence that the staff feared violence.
evidence of fear was enough- contact not needed

Question 4

chambers v dpp

Answer 4

d sent tweets when his flight risked being delayed saying he would “resort to terrorism” and “i am blowing this airport sky high”. appeal allowed as his statements were clearly a joke.

Question 5

point of law for chambers v dpp

Answer 5

if threat is made as a joke then the offence will not be committed as d lacks men’s rea

Question 6

tuberville v savage

Answer 6

d was annoyed by someone so he put his hand on his sword. he said something meaning that since the justices were hearing criminal cases in town he had no intention of using violence. his words cancelled the assault

Question 7

point of law for tuberville v savage

Answer 7

words can cancel an assault

Question 8

smith v chief superintendent woking police station

Answer 8

v at home and saw d standing in her garden staring at her through the window. found liable for assault as the victim feared the immediate infliction of force.

Question 9

point of law for smith v chief superintendent woking police station

Answer 9

the victim may fear the possibility of immediate force

Question 10

point of law for r v lamb

Answer 10

no fear = no assault

Question 11

point of law for r v misalati

Answer 11

evidence of fear and violence is enough- no need for physical contact

Question 12

point of law for chambers v dpp

Answer 12

if threat is made at a joke then the offence will not be committed, partly as d will lack men’s rea

Question 13

point of law for r v ireland and r v constanza

Answer 13

words and silence can constitute an assault

Question 14

point of law for tuberville v savage

Answer 14

words can cancel an assault

Question 15

what can the mens rea be for assault

Answer 15

intention or cunningham reckless

Question 16

r v cunningham

Answer 16

broke gas meter and has seeped next door where someone became so i’ll their life was endangered. he was charged w “maliciously administering a noxious thing”. they defined maliciously as recklessly. they defined recklessness as foreseeing that the kind of harm might happen and going ahead anyway.

Question 17

what is cunningham recklessness

Answer 17

d must appreciate that there is a risk and then goes ahead and takes that risk. d must have foresight of the consequences