Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Assault < and battery > (The acts reus for assault is to cause…
Assault < and battery >
-
-
LOGDON: Logdon said that apprehend meant a victim can think there will be force, even if that force would be impossible to carry out, as long as V thinks its possible
SMITH v CCW; Smith said that 'immediate' can also be classed as 'in the near future' as well as straight away
R V THOMAS; Thomas defined 'force' to be even the slightest touch, and can be through clothing
WILSON V PRINGLE; This said there needed to be an element of hostility for the force to be battery. Also said that the jostling of everyday life was not battery, nor is sport (as long as rules are abided by)
READ V COKER; Coker said that gestures and 'things done' can amount to assault (e.g. slitting throat, balling fists etc)
-
-
-
The mens rea for assault is intention or recklessness as to cause someone to apprehend immediate unlawful force
-
Recklessness = Cunningham; did D foresee the risk of causing V to apprehend immediate unlawful force and carry on regardless?
FAGAN v MPC; Force can be applied in different ways, such as through a continuing act
DPP v K; Force can be applied in different ways, such as indirectly (e.g. through an object)
SANTANA-BERMUDEZ; Force can be applied in different ways, such as by creating a dangerous situation through an omission (only if D has a duty to act and fails to do so)
-
-
Recklessness = Cunningham; did d foresee the risk of applying unlawful force but carry on regardless?