non fatal offences Flashcards
what act is assault and battery under
s.39 criminal justice act 1988
definition for assault
intentionally or recklessly cause the apprehension of immediate force
no fear no assault
r v lamb- shot friend but didn’t know the gun was loaded so no fear
evidence of fear is enough
r v misalati- defendant was racially and verbally abusing to colleagues
if its a joke there is no mens rea
chambers v DPP- twitter message in airport ‘resort to terrorism’
silence can be an assault
r v Ireland- silent phone calls
words can cancel an assault
Tuberville v savage- holding a sword but said something not threatening
mens rea for assault
r v cunningham- reckless
definition for battery
the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force upon another person
fagan v metropolitan police commissioner
victim need not be aware of the hit
collins v willcock
battery can be from the slightest touch
r v thomas
touching clothes can amount to a battery
r v braham
a battery can be done even out of affection
r v haystead
a battery can be an indirect action
dpp v santa-bermudez
battery can be an omission
r v venna
recklessness is enough for the mens rea of a battery
what act is ABH and GBH defined under
offences against the people act 1861 (ABH- s.47)
definition of ABH
any assault occasioning in actual bodily harm
r v roberts
the victims actions was reasonably foreseeable due to his acts even if her didn’t foresee it
r v chan-fook
psychiatric illness can amount to ABH
dpp v smith
cutting hair can amount to ABH
r v savage
defendant can be guilty even of they didn’t intend it
what section is GBH without intent under
s.20
definition of GBH
an unlawful act that leaves a wound which leads to grievous bodily harm
what does unlawful mean
the pain was not consented to e.g. a doctor or dentist
what is wounding
it must have broken all the layers of the skin
c v eisenhower
a ruptures blood vessel in eye is not a wound as it is internal
saunders
no difference between serious and really serious
r v brown and stratton
the jury can say what is or isn’t really serious harm. an accumulation can add up to really serious harm.
r v bollom
the courts take special characteristics, age and health, into account
r v burstow
psychiatric injury can be GBH
r v dica
biological GBH is possible for spreading HIV
r v mowatt
foresight of some physical harm to the victim
r v parmenter
not harm had been foreseen so no GBH
r v grimshaw
she said seen some harm would occur
DPP v A
defendant only needs to know some injury might happen not that it will
what section is GBH with intent under
s.18
r v nedrick
GBH was a virtual certain consequence of his/her actions
r v matthews and alleyne
evidential test which which can be used by the jury
