Assaults Flashcards

Question

re: simple assault what is the position regarding conditional threats?

Answer 1

D could also be liable for assault if they have made a conditional threat i.e. ‘ if you don’t shut up, I will slap you’ so long as it satisfies the immediacy requirement

Answer 2

Not all assaults are unlawful i.e. an individual using reasonable force to defend themselves

Answer 3

D intentionally or recklessly cause V to apprehended immediate and unlawful person force recklessness > D must personally foresee the risk and go on to take it

Answer 4

the threat must be made to D i.e. a father says to his daughter 'if you see Tom again, I will kill him. The daughter cannot apprehend violence because the threat was not made to her, and Tom was not present when the words were spoken. Therefore there is no assault.

Answer 5

D says 'if you go near my son, I will break your legs'. This would not satisfy the immediacy requirement because if they go near the son, which doesn't suggest immediacy.

Answer 6

* The infliction of unlawful force by D on V

Answer 7

o Direct contact o Not direct contact i.e. spitting, throwing an object, cycling over V’s foot o Indirection application of force i.e. setting a dog on V, placing an obstacle so they trip The degree of force only has to be very slight and V need not suffer any harm

Answer 8

Intentionally or recklessly inflict unlawful force on another person recklessness > D must have intended or foreseen the actual infliction of force (not just V’s apprehension)

Answer 9

D commits a common law assault (i.e. assault or battery) that occasions actual bodily harm

Answer 10

* The assault / battery must cause the harm * The usual rules on factual and legal causation apply

Answer 11

there is no further guidance in the legislation, but statute suggests “actual bodily harm means any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim. The injury need not be serious or permanent in nature, but it must be more than ‘transient or trifling’”

Answer 12

o Split lip o Stab to the arm that required three stitches o Significant bruising o Kick to the knee causing swelling o Cutting a substantial piece of V’s hair o Temporary loss of consciousness o A medically recognised psychiatric condition i.e.:  Anxiety neurosis  Reactive depression

Answer 13

o Very small bruise o Minor scratch o Red mark from a slap that fades quickly o Minor mental harm i.e.:  Strong emotions such as rage or fear  Panic attack  Nervous disposition

Answer 14

D must intentionally or recklessly occasion a simple assault or battery NB: it does not need to be shown that D intended to cause ABH. So long as the injury sustained is sufficient, S47 will be satisfied.

Answer 15

* D unlawfully wounds or inflicts grievous bodily harm

Answer 16

both layers of skin must be broken resulting in bleeding

Answer 17

o A cut of any size or severity o A scratch that draws blood o A cut to the inside of the mouth

Answer 18

o Bruising or internal bleeding o A rupture of the blood vessels in the eye

Answer 19

* Case law has confirmed this has the same meaning as ‘causes’

Answer 20

‘really serious harm’

Answer 21

* The jury/Mags will need to consider whether the injury amounts to GBH and will consider the effect on V, considering their age and health

Answer 22

o Fractured skull o Severe internal injuries o Disfigurement caused by acid o Really serious psychiatric injury o Passing HIV when D knew they had it

Answer 23

* Maliciously wound or inflict GHB on V

Answer 24

* This has been interpreted to mean intention / recklessness * D only has to foresee a risk that their actions would cause actual bodily harm (i.e. some physical harm) to V i.e. it doesn’t need to be proven that D intended to cause the full scale of the injury that they did

Answer 25

* D unlawfully wounds or causes GBH

Answer 26

either: 1. intention to cause GBH 2. intention to resist/prevent the detention of another with intention or recklessness to cause some bodily harm

Answer 27

o Intention to cause harm or wound that is lesser than GBH will not suffice; and o Recklessness will not suffice this is a high threshold

Answer 28

o Use of a weapon o Repeated punching / stamping o Evidence of clear planning

Answer 29

Consent is a defence to common law assault (i.e. assault and battery) the law implies that people consent to a level of inevitable physical conduct part of everyday life (i.e. shaking hands)

Answer 30

D must have intentionally attempted to evade detention, and they must either have intentionally or recklessly caused harm i.e. Tom is about to be arrested and lashes out and runs. In the process, he wounds the officer. He did not intend to do this, but was reckless as to causing some bodily harm to the officer. Recklessness is not normally sufficient for s18, but it is when there has been an intention to resist detention.

Answer 31

Consent is not available as a defence to any assault where harm is intended / caused (i.e. ABH & GBH). There are exceptions to this. example: two youths agreed to settle a dispute by a fist fight. V was injured. Court held V could not consent and this was not a defence under s47 as it is not in the public interest to cause harm to one another for no good reason

Answer 32

o Surgery o Dangerous exhibitions (i.e. circus acts) o Sport, provided it is properly conducted o Ear piercing and tattooing o Horseplay – the law is not clear on where the line is

Answer 33

o Sado-masochism o Body modifications i.e. nipple removal, division of tongue o Conduct in sport which is outside the rules of the game i.e. punching the opposition

Answer 34

o Consent is only valid if it has been freely given by a fully informed and competent adult o Consent is not valid if it is obtained by fraud

Answer 35

 Identity of D may be fraudulent;  Nature of the act may be fraudulent;  Quality of the act may be fraudulent.

Answer 36

Zara, who has severe learning difficulties, willingly allows her friend to practise his tattooing skills upon her arm. Because Zara thinks that the ink will wash off, her consent is not valid.

Answer 37

YES - Simple assault and battery NO - s18, 20 and 47 OAPA 1861, unless one of the recognised exceptions applies.