Chapter 15 - Non-fatal offences against the person (cases) Flashcards
What case defined assault?
R v Nelson (2013)
Which case established that words can amount to assault?
R v Constanza (1997)
What were the facts of R v Constanza?
The D wrote 800 letters and made a number of phone calls to the V and the V interpreted the last 2 letters as clear threats and the C of A said there was an assault
What case established that silence can amount to assault?
R v Ireland (1997)
What were the facts in R v Ireland?
The D made a series of telephone calls over 3 months to 3 different women and the court held that this amounted to assault but it depends on the facts of the case
What is the case associated with the apprehension of immediate unlawful force?
R v Lamb (1967)
What where the facts in R v Lamb?
The D pointed an gun at someone and they both thought there was no bullet in the chamber and therefore this cannot amount to assault because the other person does not fear immediate force
Which case is associated with the fact that the force does not need to be immediate but imminent?
Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station (1983)
What were the facts in Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station?
D broke looked through V’s bedroom window and V was terrified and thought that D was about to enter the room and the court held that this amounted to assault because the V feared what he might do next and therefore the force didn’t need to be immediate but imminent
Which two cases are associated with the idea that words indicating that there will be no violence may prevent an act from being an assault?
(1) Tuberville v Savage (1669)
2) R v Light (1857
What were the facts in Tuberville v Savage?
The D placed one hand on his sword and said ‘if it were not assize time, I would not take such language from you’ and this was held not to be an assault because it showed he was not going to do anything
What were the facts in R v Light?
The D raised a sword above the head of his wife and said ‘were it not for the bloody policeman outside, I would split your head open’ and it was held that this was assault as the words in the circumstances were not enough to negate the fear of force
What 2 cases establish that unnecessary force is not acceptable?
(1) Collins v Wilcock (1984)
2) Wood (Fraser) v DPP (2008
What were the facts in Collins v Wilcock?
When a prostitute refused to get into a police car the officer grabbed her arm preventing her from leaving, and in retaliation she scratched his arm and it was held that the officer had committed battery and therefore the D was entitled to free herself
What were the facts in Wood (Fraser) v DPP?
A police officer grabbed the arm of a man who fitted the description of the actual D and they struggled and it was held that there had been a technical assault by the police officer as he was not arresting Wood and therefore he was entitled to struggle
What case is associated with the idea that touching the victim’s clothing is sufficient for battery?
R v Thomas (1985)
What were the facts in R v Thomas?
The D touched the bottom of a woman’s skirt and rubbed it and the C of A held that touching an individuals clothes while they are wearing them is equivalent to touching the individual
What case is associated with a continuing act being sufficient for battery?
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968)
What were the facts in Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner?
The D parked his car on a police officer’s foot which he was unaware of and when asked to move he refused and therefore he had now formed the mens rea of battery
What 3 cases are associated with an indirect act being sufficient for a battery?
(1) R v Martin (1881)
(2) DPP v K (1990)
(3) Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire (2000)
What were the facts in R v Martin?
The D placed an iron bar across the doorway of a theatre and he then switched off the lights and in a panic the audience were injured when they were trapped and unable to open the door
What were the facts in DPP v K?
A schoolboy took sulphuric acid without permission and placed it in a hot-air hand drier to hide it intending to move it later, but before he could another pupil used the drier and was sprayed with acid which caused ABH
What were the facts in Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire?
The D caused a small child to fall to the floor by punching the woman holding it and the D was found guilty because he was reckless (transferred malice)
What is the case associated with whether omissions are sufficient for a charge of battery?
DPP v Santa-Bermudez (2003)
What were the facts in DPP v Santa-Bermudez?
Before searching D’s pockets he was asked if he had anything sharp on him and he said no so when the policewoman was injured by a needle in his pocket which caused bleeding this amounted to ABH
What is the case associated with the physical chastisement of a child?
A v UK (1998)
What were the facts in A v UK?
A father who had beaten his son with a garden cane was acquitted as physical chastisement of a child used to be lawful, however it is now unlawful under the Children Act 2004
What case defined actual bodily harm?
Miller (1954)
What case held that loss of consciousness was sufficient for ABH?
T v DPP (2003)
What were the facts in T v DPP?
D and a group of youths chased V and he fell and was kicked and he momentarily lost consciousness and D was convicted off assault occasioning ABH
Which case held that cutting hair can amount to ABH?
DPP v Smith (Michael) (2006)
What were the facts in DPP v Smith (Michael)?
The D had an argument with his girlfriend and cut off her ponytail without her consent and the Divisional Court held that cutting off a substantial amount of hair could amount to ABH
In what case what is held that psychiatric harm can be sufficient for ABH?
R v Chan Fook (1994)
What was held in R v Chan Fook?
ABH does not include ‘mere emotions such as fear, distress or panic’ nor does it include ‘states of mind that are not themselves evidence of some identifiable clinical condition’
What case illustrates that the D need not intend or be reckless as to whether ABH is caused?
R v Roberts (1971)
What were the facts in R v Roberts?
D was driving and made advanced to the girl in the passenger seat and she feared he would commit a serious assault and so she jumped from the car travelling at 30mph, he intended to apply unlawful force when he touched her and therefore this satisfied the mens rea for a common assault
The decision in R v Roberts was confirmed in 2 cases, what were these 2 cases?
(1) R v Savage (1991)
2) R v Parmenter (1991
What were the facts in the case of R v Savage?
D threw threw beer and the glass slipped and V’s hand was cut by the glass, the D intended to throw the beer over the woman but not injure V but the intention to apply unlawful force in the first place was sufficient for the mens rea of a s 47 offence
What case is associated with whether internal bleeding counts as a wound?
JJC v Eisenhower (1983)
What were the facts in the case of JJC v Eisenhower?
The V was hit in the eye by a shotgun pellet and this did not penetrate the eye but did cause severe bleeding under the surface of the skin and this was held not to be a wound
Which case is associated with the fact that a broken bone does not amount to a wound?
R v Wood (1830)
What were the facts in the case of R v Wood?
The V’s collar bone was broken but the skin was still intact s and therefore this was held not to be a wound
Which case defined GBH as ‘really serious harm’?
DPP v Smith (1961)
Which case held that it was permissible to direct a jury that there need be ‘serious harm’ not including the word ‘really’?
Saunders (1985)
Which case held that the severity of the injuries should be assessed according to the victim’s age and health?
R v Bollom (2004)
What were the facts in the case of R v Bollom?
A 17 month child had bruising on her abdomen, both arms and left leg the C of A quashed D’s conviction of GBH for ABH but said that bruising could amount to GBH
What case was the first conviction for causing GBH through infecting victims with diseases?
R v Dica (2004)
What were the facts in the case of R v Dica?
The D had unprotected sex with 2 women without telling them he was HIV positive and both women became infected and the D was convicted of inflicting GBH
What 2 cases are associated with the word ‘inflict’ in terms of inflicting GBH?
(1) R v Lewis (1974)
2) R v Burstow (1997
What were the facts in the case of R v Lewis?
D shouted threats at his wife through a closed door in a second-floor flat and tried to break through the door and the wife was so frightened that she jumped from the window and broke both her legs and D was convicted of a s 20 because threats could be considered a technical assault
What were the facts in the case of R v Burstow?
D carried out an 8 month campaign of harassment against a women he had a relationship with 3 years earlier and this harassment consisted of both silent and abusive phone calls, hate mail and stalking and V suffered severe depression as a result and therefore he was convicted of a s 20 offence
What case held that the D did not need to foresee serious injury?
R v Parmenter (1991)
What were the facts in the case of R v Parmenter?
D injured his 3 month old baby when he threw the child in the air and caught him and he had done this before with older children and did not realise there was a risk of injury, he conviction for a s 20 was substituted for a s 47 offence as he did not foresee any injury
Which case illustrates that an intention to wound is not enough for the mens rea of a s 18 offence?
R v Taylor (2009)
What were the facts in the case of R v Taylor?
V was found with scratches and stab wounds but from photos it was impossible to tell the depths of the wounds and therefore was unable to show whether D had intended to cause serious injury, his conviction was quashed because the judge misdirected the jury and an intention to wound was not sufficient for the mens rea of s 18 and this was substituted for a s 20 offence
What are the 3 leading cases on murder and intention?
(1) Moloney (1985)
(2) Nedrick (1986)
(3) Woollin (1998)
What case is associated with the resistance of arrest?
R v Morrison (1989)
What were the facts in the case of R v Morrison?
A police officer seized hold of D and told him she was arresting him and he dived through a window, dragging her with him and as a result her face was badly cut by glass and it was held that the prosecution must prove that the D either intended injury or realised there was a risk of injury and took that risk
