non fatal offences- battery Flashcards
what you need to be guilty...booklet 7
battery definition
application of unlawful force intending physical force or recklessness
how is battery different to assault
force used in battery but assault doesn’t require any physical touch
elements of actus reus needed to be guilty of battery
unlawful
application
force
elements of mens rea needed to be guilty of battery
intention to apply unlawful force
OR
recklessness to apply unlawful force
what situations is application of force lawful
self defense
when police are making an arrest
case (1) and acts (2) for unlawful (same ones for assault)
Wilson v Pringle- implied consent to the ‘‘ordinary jostlings of everyday life’’ (common, minor physical contacts that occur during routine interactions among people)
Criminal Law Act s.3- application of force when self defense is needed is lawful
Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) s.117- force can be used by police when making an arrest
application- indirect case
DPP v K
(guilty as d knew it would cause harm but left acid on the hand dryer)
application of force-can be a continuous act case
Fagan v MPC
(guilty as when d realised he had ran over foot he refused to move car)
application of force- can be done by an omission case
DPP v Santana- Bermudez
(guilty as d failed to warn officer about needle causing danger)
force- any unlawful contact, even a police officer case
Collins v Wilcock
(not guilty as woman acted in self defence)
force- includes touching clothes
R v Thomas
(touched hems of skirts of female students)
force- no need for the contact to be ‘‘hostile rude or aggressive’’
Faulkner v Talbot
(sexual assault against boy but she claimed she wasn’t being aggressive’’
mens rea- 2 cases
R v Cunningham- confirmed test for recklessness is subjective
R v Venna- recklessness is enough for something to be a battery
