Non Fatal Offences Flashcards
Assault, Battery, ABH, Wounding, GBh
What is the definition of assault in common law?
Intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence.
What is the actus reus of assault
actions or words that cause the victim to apprehend immediate violence
What physical reactions can indicate assault?
Shaking, crying, running away, etc.
These reactions show the victim’s apprehension of violence.
Read v Coker (1853)
Established that apprehension of immediate and unlawful violence constitutes assault.
The case illustrates how gestures can lead to an assault charge.
R v Ireland (1977)
-D. breathed silently down the phone
## Footnote
Silence can amount to assault.
This case expanded the definition of assault to include non-verbal threats.
R v Constanza (1997)
-D. graffitied a threat
## Footnote
Writing can be considered assault.
Tuberville v Savage (1669)
-“if… i would”
## Footnote
Words can negate an assault.
If = NO assault
Smith v C.C. of Woking (1983)
-D. stared into ground floor house
## Footnote
The threat must be in the near future to constitute assault.
The case emphasized that the victim’s apprehension of violence is crucial.
Logdon v DPP (1976)
-V. has fake gun pulled
Apprehension of a threat matters more than whether the threat can actually happen.
The victim’s perception of danger is key.
What is the Actus Reus (AR) for battery?
Applying unlawful force
Battery involves the application of this unlawful force to another person.
Define battery in legal terms.
Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force
What case established that touching clothes can constitute battery?
R v Thomas (1985)
In this case, touching a girl’s skirt was deemed sufficient for battery.
How can battery be applied
Direct and indirect, recklessness
Pagett, Woollin, Cunningham
When is force lawful?
Through implied consent eg sports or ordinary jostling eg messing around
In which case was there ordinary jostling?
Wilson v Pringle (1986)
The court found that the actions were not malicious and lacked mens rea.
True or False: Battery requires physical injury to the victim.
False
Battery does not require injury; it is about the application of force.
Fill in the blank: Battery is defined as the application of _______.
unlawful force
What are examples of activities that may involve battery?
- Rugby
- Boxing
- Martial arts
These activities may involve the application of force that can be considered battery under certain circumstances.
What is the significance of ‘ordinary jostlings’ in relation to battery?
They may not constitute battery
Ordinary jostlings typically do not meet the threshold for unlawful force.
What is ‘ordinary jostling’?
Inevitable contact in crowded places like supermarkets or busy streets
Referenced in Collins v Wilcock (1984), where a woman could not complain about incidental contact.
What was the main issue in Collins v Wilcock (1984)?
A woman walking away from an officer was grabbed, leading to a struggle and a scratch on the officer
The case illustrates the limits of permissible contact in public spaces.
In the context of battery, what constitutes ‘ordinary jostling’?
Shaking hands, a slap on the back, or brushing shoulders etc.
Exceeding this ordinary jostling can lead to a battery claim.
What was the ruling in Fagan v MPC?
Force can be applied through a continuing act, such as driving over a foot and staying on it
This case emphasizes the application of force in a continuous manner.
What incident was involved in the case of Santana Bermudez (2003)?
An officer was injured when D. failed to inform officer about a sharp object in pockets
This case highlights force can be through omission due to the duty to inform about potential dangers.
True or False: An omission can lead to liability if the defendant has a duty to act.
True
Liability may arise when a person’s failure to act causes harm.
Fill in the blank: A defendant can be liable for an injury caused by a _______ if they neglect their duty.
[sharp object]
Example from Santana Bermudez (2003) where failure to disclose a sharp object led to injury.
What did DPP v K conclude?
Force can be applied indirectly through objects.
D. placed acid from chem lab in hand dryer as a prank injuring other student
What is the mens rea of battery?
Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force
Mohan, Cunningham
Only direct/reckless
Battery actus reus explain exam paragraph
For the actus reus, D apply unlawful force to V.
Wilson v Pringle shows this force must be hostile and go beyond the ordinary jostlings of everyday life.
Battery mens rea explain exam paragraph
The mens rea of battery is applying unlawful force intentionally or recklessly. Intention refers to direct intent, where D. aims to bring about the consequence (R v Mohan). Recklessness refers to D. recognising a risk but carrying on regardless (R v Cunningham) Therefore to have the mesn rea for battery D. must either aim to cause the consequence or see a risk but carry on regardless, applying unlawful force.
What does ABH stand for?
Actual Bodily Harm
Defined in S47 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
What is defined as bodily harm in the context of ABH?
Defined in Section 47 of OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Includes both physical injuries and psychological harm.
What are the three requirements to prove ABH?
- Not insignificant harm (also not serious)
- Assault or battery must occur
- Victim suffers an ABH-level injury
What is the actus reus (AR) of assault in ABH cases?
Causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence
Assault must create a fear of immediate harm.
What constitutes battery in the context of ABH?
Applying unlawful force
Battery involves physical contact that is unlawful.
What is an example of an ABH injury?
R v Miller Any injury calculated to interfere with health or comfort
Examples include bruises, cuts, or psychological harm.
True or False: Psychological harm can be considered ABH.
True
Psychological harm can include conditions like PTSD or anxiety disorders.
What case involved psychological harm leading to a conviction for ABH?
R v Chan-Fook (1944)
The accused was convicted for causing psychological harm by locking the victim in a room.
Fill in the blank: Any injury that is not _______ can be considered for ABH.
insignificant
What type of emotional states are excluded from being classified as psychological harm in ABH cases?
Mere emotions like fear, anxiety, distress, or panic
Actual psychological injuries must be more severe.
What is a potential psychological injury that may qualify under ABH?
Depression or panic attacks
Serious psychological conditions may be considered for ABH.
In the case of DPP v Smith, what was the significant action taken by the defendant?
Cutting the victim’s ponytail
This action was deemed sufficient to constitute ABH despite the absence of physical injuries.
What was the outcome of the appeal in DPP v Smith regarding the cutting of hair?
Cutting hair was considered ABH
The appeal confirmed that the act of cutting hair constituted Actual Bodily Harm.
In T v DPP (2003), what condition did the victim experience?
Loss of consciousness
This was determined to be sufficient for a finding of Actual Bodily Harm.
What must be established to determine if there is ABH according to the Chan case?
injury should not be so trivial as to be wholly insignificant
The Chan case establishes a standard for assessing the severity of injury in ABH cases.
What is the significance of the case R v Savage (1990) in relation to ABH?
No mens rea required to cause injury
The case established that a defendant does not need to intend to cause injury for ABH to be applicable, MR for battery was enough
True or False: Emotional distress alone is sufficient to claim ABH.
False
ABH requires a physical injury rather than mere emotional upset.
What was the defendant’s action in the R v Savage case that caused ABH?
Threw a glass at the victim
The action of throwing glass was considered reckless and led to a finding of ABH.
What is the mens rea of ABH?
MR of the assault/battery is enough.
Assault - DI/RECK causing V. to apprehend immediate violence
Battery - DI/RECK applying unlawful force
ABH MR case
R v Savage
-D. threw beer glass at husbands new GF
-glass slipped, V. hit
MR of battery was enough for ABH
ABH Exam skills
Identify offence
Define offence
Explain AR of offence eg. assault
Apply AR of offence
Explain AR of ABH
Apply AR of ABH
Explain Causation; factual, legal, intervening acts, TSR
Apply Causation; factual, legal, intervening acts, TSR
Explain MR of offence eg assault + cases
Apply MR of offence
Conclude liability
ABH Paragraph
I
-D. has committed an ABH against V.
D
-ABH is defined in s47 of the
OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
E
-In order for the D to have
committed the actus reus, there
must be a common assault
that causes some injury.
-Firstly there must be a common assault. This is either an assault or battery. In this case there is a (battery. Battery is the application of unlawful force. / assault. Assault is causing the victim to apprehend immediate personal violence).
-*D. must apply force
What is the definition of wounding according to Section 20 of OAPA 1861?
Wounding is defined as unlawfully wounding a person
Section 20 pertains to less serious offenses.
What distinguishes Section 18 from Section 20 in the context of wounding?
Section 18 involves more serious offenses and requires direct or oblique intent
Section 18 is considered more serious than Section 20.
What are the two key elements required to prove wounding?
- Injury classified as a wound
- Act has caused the wound
What case established the definition of a wound as a break in continuity of skin?
JCC v Eisenhower
This case clarified that a wound requires a break in the skin, not just internal bleeding.
In the case of JCC v Eisenhower, what was the incident that led to the ruling?
An airgun was fired, causing a bloodshot eye without a skin cut.
According to legal definitions, what constitutes a wound?
A break in continuity of skin involving two layers
Internal bleeding alone does not qualify as a wound.
Which MR case is associated with Section 20 of OAPA 1861?
wounding AND GBH
R v Mowatt
-D. punched V. over £5 repeatedly
S.20 = direct intent or recklessness to cause some harm
Which MR case is associated with Section 18 of OAPA 1861?
wounding AND GBH
R v Belfon
-D. slashed V. in the face with a razor
S.18 = direct or oblique intent to cause serious harm
Wounding Flowchart
Wounding Exam Paragraph Structure
IDEACEA
I dentity offence
D efine offence
E xplain AR
A pply AR
C ausation - fac/leg
E xplain MR
A pply MR
What is GBH defined as in S.20/S.18 OAPA 1861?
Unlawful wounding or inflicting GBH (with intent)
GBH stands for Grievous Bodily Harm.
What is the actus reus (AR) for proving GBH?
Inflicting GBH
In the case of DPP v. Smith, what were the outcomes related to GBH?
Ordered to stop car, jumped in front and died
GBH = serious, not permenant
What is the significance of the case of R v. Brown & Stratton?
Accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm
-beat up trans, broke teeth and bruised
What was the outcome of R v. Martin (1881)?
Serious psychological harm from placing a bar on an exit
GBH can be indirect
In R v. Dica, what was concurred?
Had STD, knew, had sex
GBH can be biological harm
What type of harm is established in R v. Burstow?
Psychological harm
-distributed hate mail to ex’s neighbours
What injuries were noted in R v. Bollom?
Bruised 17-month-old
age and health considered for GBH
Fill in the blank: GBH is defined as _______.
Grievous Bodily Harm
True or False: GBH must result in permanent injury.
False
What does the case of R v Martin (1881) illustrate about indirect harm?
Injuries caused by panic in a public setting
Name a case that involved the accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm.
R v. Brown & Stratton
Examples of GBH level injuries
brain damage, broken limbs, paralysis, coma, internal bleeding
Alternative MR for both wounding AND GBH
S.18 - serious harm
Either:
1. DI/OI (R v Belfon)
2. intention to resist, DI/recklessness to cause harm (R v Morrison)
What are the requirements for the alternative MR?
- V must be police officer#
- D. intends to resist arrest
- Therefore, dir/reck to cause harm
“because its police = more culpable”
Case for alternative MR
R v Morrison
D. resisted and saw some harm
-D. held by police, ran through glass
-V. cut and bruised
