Non-Fatal offences

Question 1

What are the 5 Non-fatal offences

Answer 1

1. Assault 
2 Battery 
3 s. 47 ABH 
4 s. 20 GBH 
5 s. 18 GBH

Question 2

Where are assault and battery stated

Answer 2

No act has a definition as they are part of common law however the Criminal Justice act 1988 states sentencing guidelines

Question 3

What is the actus reus of Assault

Answer 3

An action that makes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence

Question 4

What did the case of Constnaza find

Answer 4

Words alone can result in a assault

Question 5

What did the case of Turberville v Savage highlight

Answer 5

That words can also annual an assault.

Question 6

What is the mens rea of assault?

Answer 6

Intention or recklessness to cause the defendant to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence

Question 7

What is the actus reus of a battery?

Answer 7

The application of unlawful force

Question 8

What did the case of Collin v Willcock find?

Answer 8

Any touching can result in a battery no matter how slight the touch is. There need not be any proof of harm or pain

Question 9

What did the case of Pringle state about the force that would amount to a battery

Answer 9

There must be an era of hostility surrounding a battery.

Question 10

What did the case Thomas find

Answer 10

Touching of someones clothes can amount to a battery

Question 11

What is the mens rea of a battery offence

Answer 11

The intention or recklessness as to apply malicious force to another. This was confirmed in the case of Venna

Question 12

What is the actus reus of s. 47

Answer 12

Assault or battery occasioning in actual bodily harm

Question 13

What is the definition of ABH and what is the authority for this

Answer 13

The case of Miller stated that the harm must be more than transient or trifling

Question 14

Is ABH limited to injury of the skin or bones?

Answer 14

No in the case of Smith v DPP states that cutting off of a persons ponytail can amount to ABH

Question 15

Can ABH include psychiatric injury

Answer 15

Yes the case of Chang Fook psychiatric injury must be more than fear or panic but must be some identifiable clinical condition

Question 16

What is the mens rea of section 47?

Answer 16

The mens rea is the same as an assault or battery

Question 17

What is the actus reus of section 20

Answer 17

Either inflicting GBH or causing a wound

Question 18

What harm can amount to GBH

Answer 18

Really serious harm such as broken bones and permanent damage (saunders)

Question 19

What did the case of Bollom signify?

Answer 19

That the age and physical state of the victim can be taken into account when deciding if harm amounts to GBH

Question 20

What did the case of Ireland signify in relation to GBH?

Answer 20

That psychiatric harm can amount to GBH as long as it is serious enough.

Question 21

What does the term inflict mean in the s.20 actus reus

Answer 21

Inflict means to cause and there doesn’t need to be any physical contact to cause some to suffer from GBH. As seen in the case of Burstow where the D shouted ‘fire’ in a cinema and people were injured in the panic to escape.

Question 22

What signifies a wounding?

Answer 22

The case of Eisenhower states that a wound is the break in the continuity of both layers in the skin and doesn’t include internal bleeding. Therefore the slightest cut in theory can amount to a wounding.

Question 23

Can the harm in s.20 be biological if so state the case?

Answer 23

The case of Dica states that GBH can be biological in nature when a man infected a woman with HIV

Question 24

What is the mens rea of s. 20

Answer 24

Intention or recklessness as to cause some harm.

Question 25

What did the case of Mowatt signify in relation to the mens rea of section 20?

Answer 25

That the defendant only need to foresee some harm occurring albeit only minor harm

Question 26

What is the actus reus of s.18?

Answer 26

Wounding or causing GBH

Question 27

What is the difference between s.18 and section 20 mens rea

Answer 27

There is no difference as judges have decided that inflicting and causing are the same thing the only difference between the two offences lies in the mens rea

Question 28

What is the mens rea of s.18

Answer 28

Intention to cause GBH or resist arrest. It is a specific liability offence and therefore recklessness doesn't form part of the mens rea

Question 29

What case defines the basic test for intention and what is it

Answer 29

It is when the GBH is your main aim or purpose this is from the case of Mohan

Question 30

What are the two forms of intention

Answer 30

Direct (main aim) and the case of Nedrick states that intention can be oblique if you identify that harm is a virtual certain consequence this was later confirmed in Woollin

Question 31

What type of evidence can identify that serious harm was intended (secition 18 instead of 20)

Answer 31

If there is a use of a weapon or repeated attacks

Question 32

What you should discuss if there is a cut that bleeds

Answer 32

You must discuss secion 20 because it includes a wound no matter how small the injury may seem. Discuss it as wounding rather than GBH