Assault Flashcards
What is the definition of common assault?
Causing a person to apprehend immediate unlawful force/contact
What is the actus reus of common assault?
Conduct causing victim to apprehend imminent unlawful force/contact
What is the mens rea of common assault?
Defendant intended or was reckless that the victim would apprehend imminent unlawful force
What did R v Venna 1976 establish?
- Case where man was being restrained by police
- He was lashing out and kicking to break free and kicked officer in knee
- Judge held that it didn’t matter if he had no intention to cause injury
- It was enough that he was reckless as to who was there and not caring as to whether he hurt somebody
- Conviction upheld on appeal
What happened in R v Ireland 1998?
- D called 3 women upon which he remained silent
- This caused the victims psychological harm
- D convicted for offences contrary to s.47 of OAPA 1861
- He appealed on the basis the facts were not enough to amount to offence
HELD - Appeal dismissed and conviction upheld
- Lord Steyn made clear words could constitute an assault aswell as silence
- this providing the victim suffers apprehension there may be unlawful force
- This ruling also interpreted s.47 of “bodily harm” as including psychiatric injury
What happened in Logdon v DPP 1976?
- Man threatened V with gun and told V he was going to keep him hostage
- At trial D argued that he was never intending to carry out the threat and that he was incapable of doing so has the gun was fake
HELD - Conviction upheld on appeal
- It did not provide a defence that he did not intend to carry out act or was incapable
- he had caused a fear of violence in the victim and thus was guilty of assault
What happened in Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police 1983?
- D was staring through the window of V
- V noticed D and began screaming hysterically
- D did not move and V contacted the police
- D sought to rely on the fact that because he was outside the property he could not carry out immediate violence on V
HELD - D had caused V to suffer fear of violence
- it was sufficient for V to fear what D may do nexy
- In this case it was not requisite to determine the exact nature of V’s fear or whether possible for D to carry out threat
- D had entered private land with intention to cause fear in V
What happened in R v Constanza 1997?
- D sent over 800 letter to V
- D made silent phone calls and wrote on V’s door
- Upon reading D’s letters V believe he had ‘flipped’ and feared violence from D
- Medical evidence showed V to be suffering clinical depression and anxiety
- D was convicted of ABH contrary to s.47 of the OAPA 1861
APPEAL - D sought to rely on a defence the violence the victim fear had not been sufficiently immediate because victim couldn’t see him
- Appeal dismissed
- Only in cases where the apprehended violence was in the distant future would it be wrong to leave to jury
- Time to measure apprehended violence was Time when V has fear
- In this case V believed violence could occur at any point and judge was correct to allow jury to decide whether V had immediate fear
- Case also established that prosecution must prove fear in V’s mind and
- V does not have to see potential perpetrator of violence
What is the sentencing of a common assault?
Criminal Justice Act 1988, s.39
- Upto 6 months imprisonment and/or fine
How is the offence of battery defined?
Unlawful use of force/contact against another person
What is the actus reus of battery?
- Defendant touched or applied force to victim
What is the mens rea of battery?
- Same as for common assault as defined in R v Venna 1976
- Intentional or reckless as to touching or applying force to V
Does a battery require there to be injury?
NO
- No injury is needed and therefore touching may amount to a battery
What did Faulkner v Talbot 1981 establish in regard to battery?
- That to commit the offence there is no need to be hostile, rude or aggressive
Can battery occur in medical treatment?
YES
- Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993
- Judge stated that crime of battery to administer medical treatment to adult of sound and conscious mind without his consent amounted to battery
- This principle extended to administering medical treatment of a “life support system” where it was no longer in best interests of the child
What happened in St George’s Healthcare NHS trust v S 1998?
- Woman was suffering from pre-eclampsia
- She refused treatment
- After advice from two doctors and a social worker as to the consequences of refusing treatment she still refused
- The applicant was admitted to mental hospital without her consent
- Hospital authorities obtained a declaration from the court to have the treatment done without applicant’s consent
- Declaration was granted and a C-section was provided to give birth to baby girl
APPEAL - Applicant appealed against judges declaration to allow consent to be withdrawn
- Appeal granted
- Even though her life and infants life depended on treatment a person of sound mind was entitled to refuse
- Deemed unlawful for any treatment to be given by doctor to patient which is invasive without her consent
- To do so would constitute crime of battery
What happened in Collins v Wilcock 1984?
- Two police officers approached tow women suspected of soliciting
- D walked away from officer who took her hand to restrain her
- D in reaction scratched the officers face
- She was convicted of assaulting a police officer in their line of duty
- D appealed on the grounds that the grabbing of her arm was not in line of duty and constituted a battery
HELD - Appeal upheld and conviction quashed
- judge made clear that in daily life there are general exceptions to batter e.g. supermarket congestion
- It is generally accepted that one may touch another to gain attention but only so far as reasonable
What happened in McMillan v CPS 2008?
- Police officers found drunken woman on street and advised she go home
- Later officers found woman in daughters garden shouting and swearing at door
- they advised she leave but continued shouting
- One officer took her by the elbow and escorted her from the premises
- D then began swearing and arguing with police officer where she was then arrested
APPEAL - After conviction of being drunk and disorderly in a public place
- D appealed on the grounds that the taking of her arm constituted an assault and thus are behaviour was justified
- Appeal dismissed
- Kind of touching used by officers was generally accepted in the ordinary conduct of daily life and was thius lawful
What may be seen as lawful touching and thus does not constitute a battery?
- Everyday contact e.g. tapping someone on shoulder
- Parent’s reasonable chastisement of their children
- powers of arrest
- consent
What is the actus reus of assault occasioning actual bodily harm?
- D commits an assault or battery which causes V to suffer actual bodily harm
What is the mens rea for ABH?
- Same as for assault and battery
- Intend or be reckless as to assault or battery
- No need to show D intended or foresaw ABH
How has the term ‘occasioned’ been interpreted in ABH?
Meaning the same as caused
What happened in R v Roberts 1971?
- case where man made indecent proposals to woman in car and tired to pull of her coat
- she was so frightened that she jumped from the car.
- This caused her to suffer injury
HELD - D was guilty of not just assault but also of causing actual bodily harm as he caused her to jump from the car.
What did R v Parmenter establish 1992?
That the prosecution are not obliged to prove that S intended to cause ABH or was reckless as to whether such harm would be caused.
EXAMPLE
- Brenda is sent numerous threatening text messages from Brad
- As a result Brenda begins to suffer from clinical depression and anxiety
What offence has Brad committed?
- With reference to R v Ireland
- Brad has used words which have caused Brenda actual bodily harm contrary to s.47 of the OAPA 1861
- To prove that Brad has committed this offence we must show;
- Bertha, as a result of messages, apprehended immediate use of force by Brad (not enough she was just afraid)
- Must be shown that Brad intended or foresaw that Bertha would apprehend an imminent use of force
- must be shown brenda suffered depression and anxiety as a result of the apprehension of imminent force
