Assault Flashcards
What is common assault defined as under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988?
An intentional or reckless act which causes a person to apprehend the infliction of immediate unlawful force.
(NELSON)
What is the ACTUS REUS of common assault?
An act causing the apprehension of the infliction of immediate unlawful force.
What are some examples of how D can commit the actus reus?
- Act/gesture (LOGDON) when he threatened V with a knife.
- Words (CONSTANZA) when he verbally threatened V.
- Silent phone calls/stalking (IRELAND/BURSTOW).
How can words negate an assault?
Words may negate what otherwise might be an assault (TUBERVILLE v SAVAGE/LIGHT).
Provide an example of words negating an assault.
D said that he would kill V if the police were not watching, so that is not an assault.
Provide an example where words do not negate an assault.
D said that he would kill V if the police were not watching, but V was still ‘terrified’, so the words will not have negated the assault.
What must be present for an assault to occur?
There must be fear (LAMB).
How can D cause V’s apprehension of unlawful force?
D caused V’s apprehension of the infliction of unlawful force because V ran away.
What if there was no fear in the situation?
There was no fear, as V laughed at D when he threatened him.
Can fear be caused indirectly?
Yes, the fear may be caused indirectly (DUME).
Provide an example of indirect fear.
The fear was caused indirectly when D threatened to let his dog loose on V.
What must the apprehension be of?
The apprehension must be of the infliction of ‘immediate’ unlawful force, defined flexibly in SMITH v WOKING.
What is an example of immediate unlawful force apprehension?
V thought he would soon be attacked.
What is an example where there is no fear of immediate unlawful force?
There was no fear, as V laughed at D when he threatened him.
Is causation relevant in common assault?
Causation is unlikely to be relevant, but the thin skull rule could apply.
What is the MENS REA for common assault?
Intention or recklessness AS TO causing the apprehension of immediate unlawful force.
What does D need to have to cause V’s apprehension?
D has specific/direct intention to cause V’s apprehension (MOHAN) when threatening to beat V up.
What is recklessness in relation to V’s apprehension?
D was reckless as to V’s apprehension (CUNNINGHAM/PARMENTER) when she pointed a toy gun at V.
What is the transferred malice principle?
The transferred malice principle applies, where a crime intended for one person falls on another by accident (Latimer, Mitchell).
What happens to mens rea in transferred malice?
D will still be liable as the mens rea is transferred from X to V.
What is the limitation of transferred malice?
The principle of transferred malice states that only similar crimes can be transferred.
What happens if D intended to cause property damage but hurt V?
D cannot be found guilty if D intended to cause property damage but actually hurt V (Pembliton).
What is the principle of joint enterprise in relation to transferred malice?
Under the principle of joint enterprise and transferred malice, it does not matter that D was not the one who actually injured V (Gnango).
What does the coincidence rule state?
Under the coincidence rule, the actus reus and mens rea must coincide at least once, as in Fagan v MPC and Thabo Meli.
What happens if D had mens rea of murder but not at the time of actus reus?
D will still be liable if he had the mens rea of murder when he first stabbed V, even if he thought V was dead when burying V alive.
