Crime Analysis: Assault & Battery Laws

The assignment involves reviewing and analyzing academic articles, case law, and online resources related to assault, wounding, and related offences. The articles span various aspects of this topic, including the role of aggravated offences in combating hate crime (Taylor, 2014), the impact of early adverse experiences on delinquency and recidivism (Barrett et al., 2014), the association between public housing, concentrated poverty, and crime (Hartley, 2014), and the implementation of statutory reform of offences against the person (Gibson, 2016). Additionally, resources like 'Assault, wounding and related offences' from NSW Judiciary () and 'Wounding and GBH S.20 & S.18 OAPA 1861' from e-Law Resources () provide legal context and sentencing guidelines for these offences.

CRIMINAL LAW

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
QUESTION 1...................................................................................................................................1
a) Current law on assault and battery .........................................................................................1
b) Difference between assault and battery..................................................................................2
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................4
QUESTION 2...................................................................................................................................4
1. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm..................................................................................4
2. GBH/ Wounding.....................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Assault and battery is considered as action of threatening a person together with the
action of making physical contact with them. It is necessary for authorities to have appropriate
consideration of diverse standards so that goals and objectives can be accomplished. In order to
have better understanding regarding subject (Elmore and Ross, 2015). In this regard, the
application of comparison between the assault and battery is also necessary to consider. Along
with this, essay will also provide effective application of both terms. It is referred as state where
one person tries to have physical strike on another. In other words, it also acts in threatening way
which creates and harm to the person (Nethery and et.al, 2015).
QUESTION 1
a) Current law on assault and battery
It has been noticed that assault is considered as state to state which covers form. It is also
referred as attempt to harm other person in some circumstances (Saltzman, Furman and Ohman,
2015). It includes threaten behaviour against others. In other words, it can be referred as
intentional attempt to injure another one. On the other hand, the battery is considered as
intentional offensive of another person without having a consent. It means if person is involved
in activities like intentional touching and act does not have consent from the victim.
In addition to this, it can be said that current act employed on the activities is named as
Offences Against the Person Act 1861. It is a legislative framework which is passed by
Parliament of UK and Ireland (Castillo, 2015). It covers all the values which are associated with
offences against the person. Along with this, in some circumstances the Criminal Law
Consolidation Act 1861 is also being referred by the experts. If any person is founded guilty in
regard to assault and battery act then he might face the penalty as well as jail. In this, judgements
are made according to diverse sections such as penalty for murder, disposal of body, soliciting to
murder and conspiracy. Also, section 16 to 26 indicates the information about attempt to harm
others and creating offensive situation (Barrett and et.al, 2014).
Along with this, it has been noticed that repealed act of 2009 also provides a support to
the case. It helps in analysing the jurisdiction values more properly so that goals and objectives
can be accomplished (Adinkrah, 2017). Moreover, assault with intent to commit felony is also
1

needed to be referred properly so that key standards can be well maintained. Consideration of
unlawful wounding is also essential in order to ensure about standards. If key values are not
properly referred then it will assist in resolving issues (Hartley, 2014). If person is found guilty
under both acts and legislative values then the penalty as well as other aspects of criminal law
can be employed. However, it is necessary to provide an evidence in terms of act so that ethical
values can be referred properly. Consideration of Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and
Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1861 is essential to refer so that goals and objectives can be
referred in terms of assault and battery (Covington, Huff-Corzine and Corzine, 2014).
b) Difference between assault and battery
1. Confusion between definition of assault and battery
Battery can be defined in legal term as an intentional physical contact in which other
person does not have their consent. It results in body harm and affect dignity of the person as
well. It includes offensive movements such as punching on face, unwanted hug, jostle between
two persons when passing through narrow road. It is the term in which physical contact is done
by guilty intentionally but individual does not want to hurt other (Auyero, Burbano de Lara and
Berti, 2014). For example if a friend hug other friend but opponent does not want to be hugged
then this unwanted physical contact is known as battery. Battery can be explained as intentional
offensive and harmful touching to other person is called a harmful activity. In this criminal
activity, guilty does not want to harm victim, individual just want to make con tact with them.
But if at the battery criminal activity victim does not raise their voice then it may constitute an
assault (Wintemute, 2014). It is not necessary that victim gets injured with battery offensive
action.
Assault is another criminal activity which can be defined as bodily harm activity. It is the
criminal activity in which individual intentionally hurt other, it is harmful physical contact and
harm to the victim. For example raising a fist, using weapons to hurt others are included in
assault (Gibson, 2016). It is the activity which is taken by the person to injure others. It increases
threaten among the people and physically harm them.
There are many differences in the definition of assault and Battery. In the assault there is
no need to contact physically. Wrong person can harm others without making physical contact
with them. On other hand individual intentionally make physical contact with the person without
having their consent. In battery wrong person does not have intention to hurt the victim whereas
2

in assault, individual has intention to hurt the other person by making physical contact with them
or not. Penalties in both criminal activities are different for the criminal (Taylor, 2014). In the
assault second degree misdemeanour's is given to the wrong person and individual gets
punishment of leaving in jail for 60 days and have to give fine of 500. On other hand in battery
first degree misdemeanour's is given to the guilty and individual gets punishment of living in jail
for one year and have to pay fine of 1000.
2. Placing assault and battery on to a statutory footing could address any potential confusion
Placing assault and battery on to a statutory footing can address potential confusion.
Because in the legal terminology bot h terms are differed from each others. If individual look at
the normal perspective then both criminal activities does not have major differences but when it
comes to statutory footing them there is huge difference between both (Assault, wounding and
related offences, 2017). By placing them to a statutory footing individual can find out the
difference between both terminology. When it is placed to the statutory then individual has to
proof that whether it occurred with consent or it was offensive activity. By using law and legal
regulations individual will be able to resolve confusions. By this way judge will be able to take
proper decision on the bases of available evidences (Leading Assault Lawyers, 2017).
Statutory footing means taking decision on the bases of available law and rules. Before
giving punishment to the person it is essential to look at the cause of activity and accordingly
judge is required to give punishment. By placing both assault and battery to the statutory footing
judicial system would be able to analyse the situation that whether it occurs intentionally or not
(Wounding and GBH S.20 & S.18 OAPA 1861, 2017). Government of each country has made
particular statutory footing principles that helps the justice system in making proper decisions so
that no innocent person get wrong punishment and no guilty can be safe from the punishment for
their mistake. By placing assault and battery to the statutory footing, confusions between crime
and level of crime can be minimized. It helps in give punishment to the person as per the
required law (Assault, wounding and related offences, 2017).
It is fact that assault and battery both are almost same condition but the small difference
between both is that battery is done intentionally to touch other physically. Whereas assault is
another criminal activity in which guilty needs not to make physical contact with victim,
individual can harm them without coming near to them. Booth these can create confusion in front
of authorities to give them accurate punishment (Wintemute, 2014). But when both these
3

criminal actions are placed on to a statutory footing then it can support in addressing potential
confusion.
Conclusion
From the above study it can be concluded that assault and battery both are criminal
activities but there is difference in both terms. The major difference is on physical touch and
intention of criminal of committing crime.
QUESTION 2
1. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Issue
Tom has owned newsagent shop and Jerry has also bought new newsagent shop. He has
become the biggest competitor of Tom. Due to this, sales and profit of Tom's shop was declining.
It was creating complicated situation for the person and due to which Tom was feeling irritating.
One day he saw Mr. Donald to go to Jerry's shop. He felt so angry and he hit the bottle on
Donald's head.
After that Tom has decided to teach lesson to Jerry and he took a gun. He went outside of
Jerry's home and waiting for his wring action but at the same time Jerry has seen Tom and he felt
fear. Due to this threat he spilt and his head collide with cabinet door (Assault, wounding and
related offences, 2017).
Rule
Assault rule states that criminal occur this activity to harm others intentionally. Statutory
element says that Mr. Tom has not harmed the Jerry, it was accident. Actual body harm, is the
physical injury which is far away from emotions, fear and panic situations. In such condition,
section 61 and section 59 applies here (Castillo, 2015). There was no physical harm occurred by
the Tom on Jerry, Jerry had met with cabinet due to his fear.
Application
It was the case of fear but in this case Tom was innocent because he did not harm the
Jerry self. In this condition claim of plaintiff is not valid because Tom has not physically harmed
the person. Jerry can put his view that accident occur because Tom has threatened him by using
gun. But Tom can defend own self that he was not having intention to hurt the Jerry and he did
not fire the gun (Assault, wounding and related offences, 2017). So this physical harm to Jerry is
not the mistake of Tom. Under section 59 of crime act 1900 it is clear that there should be
4

occasioning physical harm on body. Due to assault this body harm occur so Tom has made
mistake and he need to face punishment. But on other hand Tom has not harmed the Jerry by
own, Jerry had met with cabinet due to his own ignorance and fear (Wounding and GBH S.20 &
S.18 OAPA 1861, 2017).
Conclusion
From the discussion it can be concluded that it was not offence by Tom and this accident
has occurred due to the ignorance of Jerry. So Tom is not liable for the punishment.
2. GBH/ Wounding
Grievous bodily harm (GBH) is the common legal regulation, section 4 crime act defines
that GBH is the serious injury which impact on the human body temporary or permanent. Section
35 of crime act is related with reckless grievous bodily harm which is also known as wounding,
section 33 which is related with grievous bodily harm with intent (Leading Assault Lawyers,
2017). In the reckless indent as to cause GBH, guilty person face penalty less than 10 years in
imprisonment.
Wounding and GBH both are found in two different sections of offences against the
person act 1864. The conviction of GBH or wounding explains that in such incidents individual
have to face penalty of maximum 5 year imprisonment (Assault, wounding and related offences,
2017). Whereas section S.18 is very serious offensive movement in which guilty have to face
maximum 25 year punishment. Wound exists when there is break in continuity. Moriarity v
Brookes is the famous example of this wounding situations.
Causing grievous bodily harm with intent or wounding is the serious criminal activity. It
deals with serious offensive elements. In such cases police of the nation arrest the guilty person
and judicial system give punishment to the wrong person (Gibson, 2016). It also looks at the
possible defences to wounding such as harm with consent, sporting injuries, consensual sexual
activity etc. For example case of Brown and Stratton 1998 is popular for the GBH. In this case
victim was attacked by defender. Victim was having transexual identity and son and his cousin
was the main defender in this case. In this case victim went to dressed as women and defenders
attack on him with chair. In this criminal activity nose and teeth of the victim got broken.
Combined injuries was the result as GBH (Hartley, 2014).
Another example of GBH was case of BOLLOm 2003. In this case defender has caused
bruises to 17 month old baby. In the case of DICA 2004, defender has made sexual relation with
5

two victims, it was known by him that victim was HIV positive. Defender was convicted of
GBH. Grievous bodily harm is the technical word it is generally used in English criminal law. It
is generally used in the offensive cases created by section 18 and 20 offences against the person
act 1861. Section 18 is referred as wounding with intent (Wounding and GBH S.20 & S.1). Or
cause body harm to the victim with intent. Whereas section 20 was differed from section 18.
Section 20 is related with unlawful wounding. It is most serious form of assault.
Wound is the serious crime in which individual breaks skin part of the other person. In
the wounding individual does not take support of weapons. Grievous bodily harm can be
understand with the case of DPP v Smith Ac 290, HL; R v Brown 1994 (Leading Assault
Lawyers, 2017). In the case of R v Esho 2001 was another case of GBH, in which court has taken
decision that offence was the worst case in which number of people were involved and they have
attacked on the victim. It is not essential that due to the attack major injury case to victim but
attacking on individual with intention to harm them is serious criminal activity.
Consequences of wounding vary case to case. Offence committed by the person unlawful
either wounds to other or harm body badly (Assault, wounding and related offences, 2017).
Wounding is the situation in which guilty hit others in continuity and breaks their inner and outer
skin. It includes small cuts and big injuries as well. It is not charged as assault under section 20.
Whereas Grievous bodily harm is the serious harm on body in which individual meets with
permanent disability, serious psychiatric injury etc. In such condition guilty person have to face
punishment of maximum 5 year imprisonment (Covington, Huff-Corzine and Corzine, 2014).
Most serious offence come under section 18 which is known as wounding. It includes repeated
attack, prior threats, use of offensive weapons etc.
CONCLUSION
From the above study it can be concluded that assault and Battery are differed from each
others. Situation, intention and physical contact are basic difference in both offensive
movements. Judicial system have to give punishment to the guilty as per the legal rules of
particular crime.
6

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Adinkrah, M., 2017. When a Wife Says “No”: Wife Sexual Refusal as a Factor in Husband–Wife
Homicides in Ghana.Journal of Interpersonal Violence, p.0886260517742913.
Auyero, J., Burbano de Lara, A. and Berti, M. F., 2014. Violence and the State at the Urban
Margins. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography. 43(1). pp.94-116.
Barrett, D. E. and et.al., 2014. Delinquency and recidivism: A multicohort, matched-control
study of the role of early adverse experiences, mental health problems, and
disabilities. Journal of emotional and behavioral disorders. 22(1). pp.3-15.
Castillo, M. L., 2015. Not So Simple: How Simple Assault and Battery Became Distorted in the
Context of Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude. Washburn LJ. 55. pp.39.
Covington, M.W., Huff-Corzine, L. and Corzine, J., 2014. Battered police: Risk factors for
violence against law enforcement officers. Violence and victims. 29(1). pp.34-52.
Elmore, J. and Ross, L., 2015. Defending individuals charged with domestic assault and
battery. Continuing the war against domestic violence. 2. pp.269-285.
Gibson, M., 2016. Getting Their “Act” Together? Implementing Statutory Reform of Offences
against the Person. Criminal Law Review. (9). pp.597-617.
Hartley, D., 2014. Public Housing, Concentrated Poverty, and Crime. Economic Commentary,
(Oct).
Nethery, R. C. and et.al., 2015. A common spatial factor analysis model for measured
neighborhood-level characteristics: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis.Health &
place. 36. pp.35-46.
Saltzman, A., Furman, D. M. and Ohman, K., 2015. Law in social work practice. Nelson
Education.
Taylor, R. D., 2014. The Role of Aggravated Offences in Combating Hate Crime–15 years after
the CDA 1998–Time for a change?. Contemporary Issues in Law. 13(1). pp.76-92.
7

Wintemute, G. J., 2014. Support for a comprehensive background check requirement and
expanded denial criteria for firearm transfers: findings from the Firearms Licensee
Survey. Journal of Urban Health. 91(2). pp.303-319.
Online
Assault, wounding and related offences, 2017. [Online]. Available through
<https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/sentencing/assault_wounding_off
ences.html>
Leading Assault Lawyers, 2017. [Online]. Available through <https://www.olliers.com/criminal-
law/assault-grievous-bodily-harm/>
Wounding and GBH S.20 & S.18 OAPA 1861, 2017. [Online]. Available through <http://www.e-
lawresources.co.uk/Wounding-and-Grievous-Bodily-Harm-%28GBH%29.php>
8