1 / 8

Understanding Assault and Battery: Legal Overview and Definitions

Learn the legal distinctions between assault and battery, including acts, implications, and mens rea. Explore relevant case law and considerations in determining these offenses.

ecallahan
Download Presentation

Understanding Assault and Battery: Legal Overview and Definitions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assault and Battery

  2. Assault and Battery • 2 separate offences • One can be committed without the other • Together they are called “common assault” • Both common law offences • But they are recognised in Statute - S.39 Criminal Justice Act – states they are both summary offences with a maximum sentence of 6 months’ imprisonment or a fine.

  3. Assault - Definition • Ireland; Burstow– D intentionally or recklessly causes the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence

  4. Assault – Actus Reus • Actus Reus: • An act • Causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence

  5. Assault – Actus Reus – “An act” • Cannot be an omission • Can be actions, gestures, words or silence • E.g. waving a knife, a gesture like running a finger across your throat • Constanza– Words alone are enough for an assualt – D stalked V and content of letters was an assault as V read them as threats – therefore other written communications like emails and texts can also constitute assault • Ireland; Burstow– Silence can amount to an assault - silent telephone calls • Tuberville v Savage– words can also prevent an assault if they indicate D is not intending to cause the harm

  6. Assault – Actus Reus – “Causing V to apprehend Immediate Violence or Force” • “Cause”: • Apply usual rules of causation • “Apprehend”: • If V doesn’t apprehend immediate force, assault has not been committed - Lamb– if other person is not afraid there can be no assault – 2 friends playing with a gun, one man shot by the other but no assault as the shot man had not appreciated that the gun would go off • Don’t need fear – just apprehension/anticipation • “Immediate”: • Quite a wide interpretation of this - Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station– “peeping Tom” looked through V’s bedroom window at night. She apprehended immediate and unlawful personal violence even thought he was outside – immediate does not need to be instantaneous • Ireland; Burstow– V only needs to apprehend the “possibility” of an immediate attack – fear doesn’t need to be rational as long as genuine • “Violence or force” • V does not need to apprehend any injury, pain or harm • Force apprehended can be a mere touch, provided it is unwanted • Must be unlawful – usually due to lack of consent

  7. Assault - Mens Rea • Matches the AR • Savage: • Intention to cause the victim to apprehend unlawful and immediate violence; or • Recklessness as to whether the victim apprehends unlawful and immediate violence • Can be direct or indirect (oblique) intent • Recklessness is Cunningham recklessness – D must realist that his acts or words could cause V to apprehend violence

  8. Answering Questions on Assault • Was there an act? What was it? • Did the act: • Cause (normal causation rules) • V to apprehend • Immediate • Violence/force? • Was there intention or recklessness to cause V to apprehend unlawful and immediate violence

More Related