common assault (assault, battery) Flashcards
what are 2 ways of committing common assault?
assault
battery
what type of offence are assault and battery?
common law offences, no statutory definition for either, however, statute law recognises their existence as both are charged under s 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988
what is the maximum penalty for assault and battery?
s 39 of Criminal Justice Act 1988 sets out the max penalties for them is 6 months imprisonment or a fine of 5000, or both
how do assault and battery differ?
assault- there is no touching, only the fear of immediate unlawful force.
battery- there must be actual force
sometimes these overlap e.g. fear of force before force is applied
what is the definition of assault?
an assault is an act which causes the V to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful force with either an intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful personal violence, or recklessness as to whether such fear is caused
what must there be for actus reas of assault to be satisfied?
an act
which causes V to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful force
is an omission sufficient to constitute ‘an act’ for assault?
No
are words sufficient as ‘an act’ for assault? case?
yes. these can be verbal or written.
R v Constanza - letters can be assault, there was a fear of violence
R v Ireland, ‘an act’ for assault
held that even silent telephone calls can be assault, depends on the facts of the case
apprehend immediate unlawful force?
acts or words must cause V to apprehend that immediate force is going to be used against them, no assault if the in situation its clear D cannot use force
R v lamb and apprehending immediate unlawful force
pointing a gun at someone who knows it’s unloaded is not assault, the other person does not fear immediate force.
fear of immediate force is necessary, what does immediate mean?
does not mean instantaneous, but ‘imminent
what does the case Smith v Chief Superintendent Of Woking Police Station show in relation to fear of force in assault?
fear of immediate force means ‘imminent’,
fear of what he might do next (likely to be of violent nature) was sufficiently immediate for the purposes of the offence
what may prevent an act from being an assault? case?
words indicating that there will be no violence
Tuberville v Savage (1669) (not assault as he showed he wasn’t going to do anything)
what does the case of R v Light (1857) show in regards to words indicating no violence, assault?
it depends on circumstances. D raised sword above the head of his wife , assault as wife feared force would be used and the words in the circumstance where not enough to negate fear.
does the force in assault have to be unlawful?
yes
what is the mens rea for an assault?
either an intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful personal violence, or recklessness as to whether fear is caused.
test for recklessness is subjective, D must realise there is a risk his words/acts could cause another to fear violence
what is the definition of battery?
the application of unlawful force to another person intending either to apply unlawful physical force to another or being reckless as to whether unlawful force is applied.
what is the AR of battery?
the application of unlawful force to another person
what does the case of Collins v Wilcock (1984) show about force?
touching a person to get their attention is acceptable but physical restraint is not, police held her arm but was not arresting her so officer has committed a battery
{similar to Collins v Wilcock (1984)} what does the case of Wood (Fraser) v DPP (2008) show about force in battery?
as officer had not arrested W, there was technical assault bt police officer of holding his arm, W entitled to struggle and not guilty.
can touching a person’s clothing constitute battery?
R v Thomas (D touched bottom of woman skirt)
‘if you touch a person’s clothes while he is wearing them that is equivalent to touching him’
can a battery be committed by a continuing act? case?
yes, as shown in Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968), D parked unknowingly on officer’s foot (no full offence of battery as no intention) however this became battery the moment intention was formed to leave wheel on foot.
can battery be committed by an indirect act? case?
yes, D causes force to be applied without touching V
DPP v K (acid in drier)
Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire, D caused baby to fall by punching woman holding baby
case for omission in battery?
DPP v Santa-Bermudez,
officer searching D’s pockets asks D if there are any sharp objects, D says ‘no’, officer injured by needle in pocket,
failure to tell could to actus reus
when can force be lawful and so not be battery?
- where V gives genuine consent
- when used in self defence/preventing crime (only if reasonable in circumstance)
- correction of a child (only if it does not cause injury)
what is the mens rea for battery?
intention to apply unlawful physical force to another or recklessness as to whether force is applied.
