Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Crime SB > W6 Offences Against the Person > Flashcards

W6 Offences Against the Person Flashcards

1
Q

Offences Against the Person Act 1861

A

Defines:
s.18 GBH with intent
s.20 Maliciously wounding/inflicts GBH
s. 47 Assault occasioning actual bodily harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What does GBH stand for?

A

Grievous bodily harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What does ABH stand for?

A

Actual bodily harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the authority for common assault and battery?

A

Common law
Assault - Collins and Wilcock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the elements of common assault?

A

AR: causing another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate (or imminent) unlawful force on his person - Collins and Wilcock
MR: Intention or recklessness towards causing AR - Venna

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Collins and Wilcock

A

Facts: Two women appeared to be soliciting sex for money. Police officers stopped to caution them - one woman tried to walk away and the police officer grabbed her arm. The grabbing of the arm was unlawful (as officer didn’t have grounds for detainment or arrest, and was ruled more than the acceptable contact for grabbing someone’s attention) and as such a battery.

Significance: Authority for definition of AR for common assault and battery - does not include jostling of every day life

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Does physical contact need to occur for common assault?

A

No, just the apprehension of immediate/imminent unlawful force on their person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Does the victim need to perceive the immediate unlawful force for common assault?

A

Yes, it is a subjective test. Not common assault if V didn’t see/were unconscious, etc.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Does the immediate unlawful force need to be clear/defined for common assualt?

A

No - Smith v CS Woking Police

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Smith v CS Woking Police

A

Facts: D looked through the window at V, with intention to frighten. V was frightened - didn’t know what D would do next.

Significance: Common assault - The immediate unlawful force does not need to be clearly defined.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Ireland and Burstow

A

Facts: D made a series of silent telephone calls to V. While the apprehension of unlawful force was not immediate, it was imminent.

Significance: Widened definition of common assault to include imminent unlawful force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Common assault: Does the imminent unlawful force need to be committed by D?

A

No :
1) Doesn’t need to be actually committed
2) Can be indirect - violence by dog or accomplice
3) Can be conditional (but still possible - Tuberville v Savage)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Venna

A

Facts: Youths creating a disturbance were arrested. D struggled, fracturing a police officer’s hand. Decided that recklessness towards use of force can satisfy the mens rea in an assault.

Significance: Authority for mens rea of assault

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the elements of battery?

A

AR: Infliction of unlawful personal violence
MR: Intention or recklessness towards AR
Authority: Collins and Wilcock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

How much damage is required to be a battery?

A

None- any unlawful contact/violation of bodily autonomy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What makes physical contact unlawful?

A

Lack of consent or lawful excuse (e.g. security patdown)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Does V need to apprehend the physical contact in battery?

A

No - can include touching of clothes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Does D need to make personal physical contact for battery?

A

No - can be indirect such as throwing something, spitting, acid in hand dryer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

DPP v K

A

Facts: Acid in hand dryer, sprayed next person to use hand dryer.

Significance: D doesn’t have to personally touch V for battery - can cause unlawful contact of other things.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Rules on consent re: battery?

A

V must have capacity to consent
Implied consent to physical contact which is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of daily life
If D genuinely (even if unreasonably) believes they have V’s consent then lawful - Jones

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Jones and others

A

Facts: Schoolboys threw V into air and dropped him.

Significance: Consent as a defence to battery. D genuinely believed he had consent, so defence worked, even if D was mistaken.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is the authority for assault occasioning actual bodily harm?

A

s.47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What are the elements for ABH?

A

AR:
Conduct: Assault or battery
Circumstances:
Consequences: Causing actual bodily harm

MR: Intention or recklessness towards common assault/battery. Does not require D to foresee risk of ABH. (Roberts didn’t foresee V jumping out of car; Savage didn’t intend to throw the glass but the beer alone would’ve been battery)

24
Q

What is the definition of actual bodily harm?

A

Any hurt or injury which interferes with health and comfort of V - Miller
Can include recognisable psychiatric illness - Ireland and Burstow
Not limited to injury - can include cutting hair - DPP v Smith

Generally, includes scratches, minor bruising, swelling, black eyes, minor fractures - CPS charging standards

25
Q

Miller

A

Facts: A married couple were separated after husband’s adultery. Wife petitioned for divorce, was awaiting trial, when husband raped her, leaving her in a hysterical and nervous condition. Found that D could not be guilty of rape because they were still married (eww) but was could be guilty of ABH for injury to V’s state of mind.

Significance: Defines actual bodily harm as anything interfering with the health and comfort of V, including injury to state of mind.

26
Q

DPP v Smith

A

Facts: D cut off V’s ponytail and some hair on top of her head. Held that hair was included in “bodily”, and that pain or injury wasn’t necessary for the definition.

Significance: Hair cutting included in ABH.

27
Q

Savage

A

Facts: D meant to throw beer over V, accidentally threw beer glass as well, leading to a wound.

Significance: MR for s.47 is the same as MR for assault or battery. Even if the injuries were unintentional, just had to intend fear or unlawful touching.

28
Q

What is the authority for infliction of grievous bodily harm?

A

s.20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

29
Q

What are the elements of a s.20 offence?

A

AR:
Conduct: Unlawful
Circumstances:
Consequences: wound or grievous bodily harm

MR: Malicious or Recklessness towards the risk of some injury (need not foresee full injury)

s.20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

30
Q

What is the definition of a wound?

A

The continuity of the whole skin must be broken - Eisenhower

31
Q

A Minor v Eisenhower

A

Facts: D fired an air pistol which hit V in the eye, rupturing internal blood vessels. Successfully appealed against his conviction for a s.20 offence as there was no wound.

Significance: “Wound” requires break in the whole skin.

32
Q

What is the definition of grievous bodily harm?

A

Really serious (DPP v Smith)
Depends on effect of the injuries on V, considers V’s age and health (Bollom)
Generally includes broken bones, substantial blood loss, injuries resulting in disability
Can include serious disease (Dica)

33
Q

Bollom

A

Facts: D intentionally inflicted bruising and abrasions to a 17-month-old child. Appealed against being convicted with GBH as the judge shouldn’t have directed jury to take into account victim’s age. Appeal found that the original judge was right to see V’s age as a determining factor.

Significance: Age and health of victim is considered when determining if injuries are “grievous”.

34
Q

Dica

A

Facts: D knew he was HIV+, had unprotected sex with two women without informing them. They had consented to sex, but not to bodily harm.

Significance: Consent must be free, informed, voluntary. Infliction of disease is GBH.

35
Q

What are the elements of a s.18 offence?

A

AR:
Conduct: Unlawful
Circumstances:
Consequences: wound or grievous bodily harm

MR: Maliciousness (meaning intent or foresight)
NOT RECKLESS
“with intent to do some grievous bodily harm to any person, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person”

s.18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

36
Q

What is the authority for infliction of grievous bodily harm with intent?

A

s.18 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861

37
Q

When is consent a valid defence to an offence against the person?

A

Consent is a defence:
Common Assault
Battery

Consent is only a defence in certain circumstances:
s.47 Assault occasioning ABH
s.18 GBH
s.20 GBH with intent

38
Q

Brown

A

Facts: D inflicting sado-masochistic injuries to V in a consensual scenario. Consent was not an available defence.

Significance: s.47, s.20., and s.18 - consent not a defence unless the defendant can show policy/public interest requirement to be classified as lawful

39
Q

Wilson

A

Facts: Mrs. Wilson asked her husband to brand his name onto her bottom. Consent was a defence here, due to privacy of matrimonial home and drew an analogy to tattooing.

Significance: Exception to Brown.

40
Q

Aitken

A

Facts: Pilots poured white spirit onto victim’s flying suit and lit it, V suffered life threatening burns.

Significance: “Horseplay” defence. Rough games are a lawful activity if no intention to cause injury. Consent is a defence if Ds genuinely believed V consented.

41
Q

How to approach PBLs in Crime

A

1) Identify potential defendants and the potential offences. May be asked to focus on specific Ds or types of offence.
2) Do the actions fulfill all elements of the actus reus? Think conduct/omission, circumstances, and consequences. Name the elements and analyse.
3) Was there a causal link (where required)?
4) Do the elements fulfill the mens rea? Name the elements and analyse.
5) Did the mens rea and actus reus coincide? Fresh act/continuing act/single transaction, etc.

42
Q

Defines:
s.18 GBH with intent
s.20 Maliciously wounding/inflicts GBH
s. 47 Assault occasioning actual bodily harm

A

Offences Against the Person Act 1861

43
Q

Facts: Two women appeared to be soliciting sex for money. Police officers stopped to caution them - one woman tried to walk away and the police officer grabbed her arm. The grabbing of the arm was unlawful (as officer didn’t have grounds for detainment or arrest, and was ruled more than the acceptable contact for grabbing someone’s attention) and as such a battery.

Significance: Authority for definition of AR for common assault and battery - does not include jostling of every day life

A

Collins and Wilcock

44
Q

Facts: D looked through the window at V, with intention to frighten. V was frightened - didn’t know what D would do next.

Significance: Common assault - The immediate unlawful force does not need to be clearly defined.

A

Smith v CS Woking Police

45
Q

Facts: D made a series of silent telephone calls to V. While the apprehension of unlawful force was not immediate, it was imminent.

Significance: Widened definition of common assault to include imminent unlawful force.

A

Ireland and Burstow

46
Q

Facts: Youths creating a disturbance were arrested. D struggled, fracturing a police officer’s hand. Decided that recklessness towards use of force can satisfy the mens rea in an assault.

Significance: Authority for mens rea of assault

A

Venna

47
Q

Facts: Acid in hand dryer, sprayed next person to use hand dryer.

Significance: D doesn’t have to personally touch V for battery - can cause unlawful contact of other things.

A

DPP v K

48
Q

Facts: Schoolboys threw V into air and dropped him.

Significance: Consent as a defence to battery. D genuinely believed he had consent, so defence worked, even if D was mistaken.

A

Jones and others

49
Q

Facts: A married couple were separated after husband’s adultery. Wife petitioned for divorce, was awaiting trial, when husband raped her, leaving her in a hysterical and nervous condition. Found that D could not be guilty of rape because they were still married (eww) but was could be guilty of ABH for injury to V’s state of mind.

Significance: Defines actual bodily harm as anything interfering with the health and comfort of V, including injury to state of mind.

A

Miller

50
Q

Facts: D cut off V’s ponytail and some hair on top of her head. Held that hair was included in “bodily”, and that pain or injury wasn’t necessary for the definition.

Significance: Hair cutting included in ABH.

A

DPP v Smith

51
Q

Facts: D meant to throw beer over V, accidentally threw beer glass as well, leading to a wound.

Significance: MR for s.47 is the same as MR for assault or battery. Even if the injuries were unintentional, just had to intend fear or unlawful touching.

A

Savage

52
Q

Facts: D fired an air pistol which hit V in the eye, rupturing internal blood vessels. Successfully appealed against his conviction for a s.20 offence as there was no wound.

Significance: “Wound” requires break in the whole skin.

A

A Minor v Eisenhower

53
Q

Facts: D intentionally inflicted bruising and abrasions to a 17-month-old child. Appealed against being convicted with GBH as the judge shouldn’t have directed jury to take into account victim’s age. Appeal found that the original judge was right to see V’s age as a determining factor.

Significance: Age and health of victim is considered when determining if injuries are “grievous”.

A

Bollom

54
Q

Facts: D knew he was HIV+, had unprotected sex with two women without informing them. They had consented to sex, but not to bodily harm.

Significance: Consent must be free, informed, voluntary. Infliction of disease is GBH.

A

Dica

55
Q

Facts: D inflicting sado-masochistic injuries to V in a consensual scenario. Consent was not an available defence.

Significance: s.47, s.20., and s.18 - consent not a defence unless the defendant can show policy/public interest requirement to be classified as lawful

A

Brown

56
Q

Facts: Mrs. Wilson asked her husband to brand his name onto her bottom. Consent was a defence here, due to privacy of matrimonial home and drew an analogy to tattooing.

Significance: Exception to Brown.

A

Wilson

57
Q

Facts: Pilots poured white spirit onto victim’s flying suit and lit it, V suffered life threatening burns.

Significance: “Horseplay” defence. Rough games are a lawful activity if no intention to cause injury. Consent is a defence if Ds genuinely believed V consented.

A

Aitken

Crime SB (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions