Topic 5 Non-fatal offences test. Topic 5 Non-fatal offences test Question 1 What is common assault?

Topic 5 Topic 5

Non-fatal offences test

Topic 5 Non-fatal offences test

Question 1

What is common assault?


Answer 1

Often, the offences of assault and battery occur at the same time. This is know as common assault.

Topic 5

Question 2

How is ABH defined in the case of R v Chan Fook?



Answer 2

Lord Justice Hobhouse said in the Court of Appeal that ‘the word “actual” indicates that the injury (although there is no need for it to be permanent) should not be so trivial as to be wholly insignificant’.

Topic 5

Question 3

What happened in Smith v Chief Superintendent, Woking Police Station (1983)?



Answer 3

The victim was at home in her ground-floor flat dressed in her nightdress. She was terrified when she suddenly saw the defendant standing in her garden, staring at her through the window. The court held that he was liable for assault, on the grounds that the victim feared immediate infliction of force, even though she was safely locked inside the building.

Topic 5

Question 4

Who wrote the Joint Charging Standards?



Answer 4

The police and the Crown Prosecution Service wrote the Joint Charging Standards.

Topic 5

Question 5

What does it mean when a person ‘negates’ his or her assault?



Answer 5

There is no assault if it is obvious to the victim that the defendant cannot or will not carry out his or her threat of violence. In Tuberville v Savage (1669), annoyed by someone’s comments to him, the defendant put his hand on his sword, which by itself would have been enough to constitute an assault. However, at the same time he said: ‘If it were not assize time I would not take such language.’ This meant that since judges were hearing criminal cases in town at the time, he had no intention of using violence. His statement negated the threat.

Topic 5

Question 6

Can words alone constitute an assault?



Answer 6For many years, the courts have debated whether words can amount to an assault. In R v Meade and Belt (1823), people were gathered around a house and started to sing menacing songs and to use violent language. Judge Holroyd said that ‘no words or singing are equivalent to an assault’. However in R v Wilson (1955), Lord Goddard stated of the accused: ‘He called out “Get out the knives”, which itself would be an assault.’ As Wilson is a more recent case, this outcome is preferred.

More recently, the House of Lords has decided that a silent telephone call can constitute an assault. If the psychological injury is significant, this could even constitute ABH or GBH (R v Ireland, R v Burstow,

1997).

Topic 5

Question 7

What is the mens rea required for s.20 GBH?



Answer 7

The mens rea of s.20 GBH is described by the word ‘maliciously’. In R v Cunningham (1957), it was stated that for purposes of the 1861 Act, ‘maliciously’ meant ‘intentionally or recklessly’. There is no need to intend GBH or wounding, or to be reckless as to whether GBH or wounding might be caused. The defendant needs only intend or be reckless that his or her actions could cause some physical damage, e.g. R v Grimshaw (1984) and R v Parmenter (1991).

Topic 5

Question 8

What are the different sentences for each of the non-fatal offences?



Answer 8

Assault: 6 months’ imprisonment

Battery: 6 months’ imprisonment

ABH: 5 years’ imprisonment

Section 20 GBH: 5 years’ imprisonment

Section 18 GBH: up to life imprisonment

Topic 5

Question 9

Name three criticisms of the current non-fatal offences.



Answer 9

Wording, sentencing, inconsistency

or common law.

Topic 5

Question 10

Name two reports that have suggested changes to the current non-fatal offences.



Answer 10

The Law Commission Report 1993 and the Home Office Report 1998.

Topic 5 Non-fatal offences test. Topic 5 Non-fatal offences test Question 1 What is common assault?

Documents