NON-FATAL OFFENCES Flashcards
Give the hierarchy of the non-fatal offences
Least serious to most:
1)assault
2)battery
3)ABH
4)S20 GB
5)S18 GBH
IDENTIFYING NON FATAL OFFENCES-FLOW CHART
WAS THE VICTIM INJURED?
No the victim wasn’t injured
If the victim wasn’t injured then it’s :
Assault and/or battery
(If no physical contact then assault, if physical contact then battery)
IDENTIFYING NON FATAL OFFENCES-FLOW CHART
WAS THE VICTIM INJURED?
YES the victim was injured
Yes the victim was injured:
-HOW SERIOUS WAS THE INJURY:
IF SLIGHT- it’s assault occasioning ABh under S47 OAPA (1861)
IF REALLY SERIOUS OR A WOUND:
-did the defendant intend to cause serious harm?
NO-
-most likely wounding it GBH under S20 OAPA (1761)- but need MR for some physical harm.
-if no MR for some physical harm then S.47
-did the defendant intend to cause serious harm?
-YES:
-it’s wounding or GBH either way intent under S.18 OAPA
What does assault mean?
-non physical offence
- assault occurs when a person apprehends lawful force
(Other person thinks you’re going to use force against them)
What would you state in first paragraph when talking about assault?
-The D is likely to be charged with assaults
-Where assault is defined from
-state the act etc
What is assault defined by?
Assault is defined by common law (defined by cases)
What is the Act that mentions assault?
Section 49 of the criminal Justice Act 1988.
What does S39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 mention about assault?
Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 mentions assault as being a summary offence with a fixed term sentence of 6 months.
What is the ACTUS REUS of assault?
The ACTUS REUS of assault is:
-An act that causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force.
In terms of discussing the act, what would you then say? (After talking about AR)
There must be an act. It cannot be an omission.
What are the ways that the act can that act be through
-Written or spoken words- Constanza
-Actions (e.g looking through a window)- Smith V Chief Superintendent of Woking Police (Smith V CSoWP)
-Silence (Ireland)
(APPLY AFTER EACH)
What would you say when discussing APPREHENSION OF UNLAWFUL FORCE?
State :
The victim must apprehend unlawful force (Lamb)
THEN APPLY TO SCENARIO
What would you say when discussing assault being IMMEDIATE?
State:
-The V must apprehend that the unlawful force will pursue immediately.
-In Smith v CSOWP, the court stated that immediate does not have to mean there and then. It is immediate if the V does not know what will happen next. (The V must believe that unlawful force will be applied to them next).
APPLY
If relevant, state and apply:
-If no immediate harm can actually pursue then it cannot be assault.
-In Tuberville v Savage, the court held that where there is a conditional threat, the words can negate
Review:
What did the court state in Smith V CSoWP?
The court stated that immediate does not have to mean there and then.
It is immediate if the V does not know what will happen next.
What does Tuberville V Savage state?
If no immediate harm can actually pursue then it cannot be assault.
-In Tuberville V Savage the court held that where there is a conditional threat, the words negate the threat.
(APPLY)
What should you discuss about unlawful force?
-This should have already been discussed under ‘apprehend’.
-If there are any causation issues, discuss this before concluding AR
- then conclude is AR met.
What is the mens rea of assault?
The mens rea of assault is:
Intentional or recklessness as to causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force - SAVAGE
THEN APPLY
(If transferred malice is an issue discuss here)
-CONCLUDE IS AR MET?
-OVERALL CONCLUSION
What would you first talk about in a Battery scenario?
-D is likely to be charged with battery
-what its provided by
-the act
What is Battery provided under?
Battery is provided under common law.
Which Act mentions battery?
(However), Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act mentions the fact that it is a a summary offence and that it has a fixed term sentence of 6 months.
What is the ACTUS REUS of battery?
Application of unlawful force
(If an omission in scenario discuss before talking about AR)
State what was said in Collins V Wilcock:
In Collins V Wilcock:
Lord Goff said:
-an unwanted touch can technically amount to unlawful force. This was confirmed in Thomas.
APPLY
IF RELEVANT STATE AN APPLY:
Thomas said this includes the slightest of touch (In this case, the caretaker touched the girl’s hem of her skirt).
IF RELEVANT STATE AN APPLY
.
> Lord Goff also said, however, that everyday jostling is inevitable (and there is implied consent to it)
but ‘no greater degree of contact than that necessary should be used’.
-If greater degree of contact is used than necessary, then that can be unlawful force.
What does DPP V K and HAYSTEAD illustrate
( you only state this if relevant and then apply)
- A battery may be indirect (where D doesn’t aim to touch V)
-This was illustrated in DPP v K and HAYSTEAD (student and acid)
IF RELEVANT what should you state about the force being unlawful?
If relevant state:
-The force has to be ‘unlawful’. It may be lawful if the V consents
Apply or if used in self-defence/defence of another/prevention of crime
Apply
-the state (if relevant):
-Force may be lawful if used in the correction of a child by a parent.
-if any causation issue discuss before concluding MR.
-CONCLUDE: IS AR MET OR NOT
