Introduction

In the context of criminal law, "assault and battery" are typically components of a single offense. In tort law, "assault" and "battery" are separate, with an assault being an act which creates fear of an imminent battery, and the battery being an unlawful touching. Assault and battery are intentional torts, meaning that the defendant actually intends to put the plaintiff in fear of being battered, or intends to wrongfully touch the plaintiff. The wrongful touching need not inflict physical injury, and may be indirect (such as contact through a thrown stone, or spitting). This article describes the law of assault and battery as it is commonly applied, although the law may vary in any specific jurisdiction.

Assault
An assault invoves: 1. An intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force; 2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril; 3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented. Note that an assault can be completed even if there is no actual contact with the plaintiff, and even if the defendant had no actual ability to carry out the apparent threat. For example, a defendant who points a realistic toy gun at the plaintiff may be liable for assault, even though the defendant was fifty feet away from the plaintiff and had no actual ability to inflict harm from that distance.

Battery
A battery is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that persons will by another person, or by an object or substance put in motion by that other person. Please note that an offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. A defendant who emphatically pokes the plaintiff in the chest with his index finger to emphasize a point may be culpable for battery (although the damages award that results may well be nominal). A defendant who spits on a plaintiff, even though there is little chance that the spitting will cause any injury other than to the plaintiff's dignity, has committed a battery.

Privilege
In order to be liable for an assault or battery, the defendant must lack privilege to assault or batter the plaintiff. The following are examples of "privilege":

Consent
Where a defendant has the plaintiff's consent to commit an act of assault or battery, the plaintiff may not later bring a lawsuit. The most typical context for consent occurs in sports. The intentional foul in basketball, or the tackle in football, are an anticipated part of the game. While it may be possible for certain conduct to be so far outside the realm of what is reasonable to nonetheless give rise to a tort - for example, chopping an opposing player off at the knees in a football game, an action which is known to have a very high probability of causing serious and even crippling injury - rule violations which are part of standard play are unlikely to support a legal action. Consent also exists in the context of authorized medical or surgical procedures.

Police Conduct
A police officer is privileged to apply the threat of force, or if necessary to apply actual force, in order to effect a lawful arrest. A defendant who suffers injury as the result of reasonable force exerted by the police to effect a lawful arrest will not be able to sustain a lawsuit against the arresting officers for assault or battery.

Self-Defense
A person who is assaulted may use such reasonable force as may be necessary, or which at the time reasonably appears to be necessary, to protect himself or herself from bodily harm. An act of self-defense must ordinarily be proportionate to the threat. That is, if you believe a person is going to spit on you, depending upon the context it may be reasonable to push the person away, but it would not be reasonable to hit the person with a baseball bat. A plaintiff may be expected to withdraw from the threat, if possible, before engaging in forcible resistance. However, if the plaintiff is in his own home and the defendant is not a member of the plaintiff's household, a plaintiff will typically not be required to further withdraw from the threat once the plaintiff has retreated to his own home.

Defense of Others
Defense of others is similar to self-defense, and usually occurs in the context of one family member protecting another. Some jurisdictions permit a defendant to assert defense of others, even where the defendant is mistaken as to the existence of a threat, as long as the mistake is reasonable. Other jurisdictions do not permit this defense unless there was an actual threat or battery against the other person.

Voluntary (Mutual) Combat

Where the plaintiff voluntarily engages in a fight with defendant for the sake of fighting and not as a means of self-defense, the plaintiff may not recover for an assault or battery unless the defendant beat the plaintiff excessively or used unreasonable force. If two people voluntarily enter a brawl, it is unlikely that either will be able to sue the other. However, if one falls, and the other takes advantage of the situation by kicking him and causing injury, that act may well be considered to be an excessive use of force which would support a cause of action.

Defense of Property
Many jurisdictions allow the use of some amount of threat or force by a person who is seeking to protect his own property from theft or damage. In most jurisdictions, there is no privilege to use force that may cause death or serious injury against trespassers unless the trespass itself threatens death or serious injury. Please note that there are some jurisdictions with extraordinarily broad laws, permitting the use of significant and even deadly force to prevent the theft of property. (Leaving aside the moral issues of using physical force to defend property, be sure that you know your local laws before applying force in such a situation.)

Discipline
Some people are legally authorized to apply physical restraint or battery in order to discipline others. For example, in most jurisdictions, parents are legally authorized to apply reasonable physical discipline upon their children. In some jurisdictions, school teachers are permitted to apply a certain level of physical restraint or discipline against students. The staff of a mental health facility may have legal authority to apply reasonable restraint to prevent a patient from causing harm to himself, to others, or to property.

Merchant's Privilege
Most jurisdictions grant merchants the right to apply reasonable force to detain shoplifters, or other persons who the merchant reasonably believes are attempting to steal the merchant's property.

Provocation
Words alone, no matter how insulting or provocative, do not justify an assault or battery against the person who utters the words.

Assault
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Physical assault) Jump to: navigation, search This article is about the criminal act. For tortious aspects of assault, see Assault (tort). For other uses, see Assault (disambiguation).

Criminal law
Part of the common law series

Element (criminal law)

Actus reus Mens rea Causation Concurrence

Scope of criminal liability

Complicity Corporate Vicarious

Inchoate offenses

Attempt Conspiracy Solicitation

Offence against the person

Assault Battery False imprisonment Kidnapping Homicide crimes Murder Felony murder Manslaughter Negligent homicide

Crimes against property Arson Blackmail Burglary Embezzlement Extortion False pretenses Larceny Possessing stolen property Robbery Theft Crimes against justice Compounding Misprision Obstruction Perjury Malfeasance in office

Perverting the course of justice Defenses to liability Defense of self Defence of property Consent Diminished responsibility Duress Entrapment Ignorantia juris non excusat Infancy Insanity Intoxication defense Justification Mistake (of law) Necessity Loss of Control (Provocation) Other common law areas Contracts Evidence Property Torts Wills, trusts and estates Portals Criminal justice Law

v d e

In law, assault is a crime causing a victim to fear violence. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact. The specific meaning of assault varies between countries, but can refer to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, or in the more limited sense of a threat of violence caused by an immediate show of force.[1][2] Assault in some US jurisdictions[which?] is defined more broadly still as any intentional physical contact with another person without their consent;[3][4][5] but in the majority of the United States and in England & Wales and all other common law jurisdictions in the world, this is defined instead as battery. Some jurisdictions have incorporated the definition of civil assault into the definition of the crime making it a criminal assault to intentionally cause another person to apprehend a harmful or offensive contact.

Contents

1 Definition o 1.1 Battery o 1.2 Aggravated assault 2 Defenses o 2.1 Consent

2.2 Arrest and other official acts 2.3 Punishment 2.4 Prevention of crime 2.5 Defense of property 3 Regional details o 3.1 Canada o 3.2 India o 3.3 Nigeria o 3.4 Pacific Islands o 3.5 Republic of Ireland o 3.6 South Africa o 3.7 United Kingdom 3.7.1 England and Wales 3.7.1.1 Aggravated assaults 3.7.2 Scotland 3.7.3 Northern Ireland o 3.8 United States o 3.9 Ancient Greece 4 See also 5 Notes 6 References 7 External links

o o o o

Definition
Battery
In common law, criminal assault often accompanied battery. See common assault. The elements of battery are (1) a volitional act[6] (2) done for the purpose of causing a harmful or offensive contact with another person or under circumstances that make such contact substantially certain to occur and (3) which causes such contact.[7] Thus throwing a rock at someone for the purpose of hitting him is a battery if the rock in fact strikes the person and is an assault if the rock misses. The fact that the person may have been unaware that the rock had been thrown at him is irrelevant under this definition of assault.

Aggravated assault
Aggravated assault is, in some jurisdictions, a stronger form of assault, usually using a deadly weapon.[8] A person has committed an aggravated assault when that person:

attempts to cause serious bodily injury to another person such as in the case of kidnapping attempts to have sexual activity with another person under the age of consent attempts or causes bodily injury to another person with a deadly weapon.

Aggravated assault can also be charged in cases of harm against police officers or other public servants, or for bodily harm stemming from the reckless operation of a motor vehicle.

The latter is often referred to as either vehicular assault or aggravated assault with a motor vehicle.

Defenses
Although the range and precise application of defenses varies between jurisdictions, the following represents a list of the defenses that may apply to all levels of assault:

Consent
Exceptions exist to cover unsolicited physical contact which amount to normal social behavior known as de minimis harm. Assault can also be considered in cases involving the spitting on, or unwanted exposure of bodily fluids to others. Consent may be a complete or partial defense to assault. In some jurisdictions, most notably England, it is not a defense where the degree of injury is severe, as long as there is no legally recognized good reason for the assault.[9] This can have important consequences when dealing with issues such as consensual sadomasochistic sexual activity, the most notable case being the Operation Spanner case. Legally recognized good reasons for consent include; surgery, activities within the rules of a game (Mixed martial arts, wrestling, boxing, or contact sports), bodily adornment (R v Wilson), or horseplay (Jones and others). However, any activity outside the rules of the game is not legally recognized as a defense of consent. In Scottish Law, consent is not a defense for assault.

[edit] Arrest and other official acts

Police officers and court officials have a general power to use force for the purpose of performing an arrest or generally carrying out their official duties. Thus, a court officer taking possession of goods under a court order may use force if reasonably necessary.

[edit] Punishment
In some jurisdictions such as Singapore, judicial corporal punishment is part of the legal system. The officers who administer the punishment have immunity from prosecution for assault. In the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, corporal punishment administered to children by their parent or legal guardian is not legally considered to be assault unless it is deemed to be excessive or unreasonable. What constitutes "reasonable" varies in both statutory law and case law. Unreasonable physical punishment may be charged as assault or under a separate statute for child abuse. Many countries, including some US states, also permit the use of less severe corporal punishment for children in school. In English law, s58 Children Act 2004, limits the availability of the lawful correction defense to common assault under s39 Criminal Justice Act 1988.

Prevention of crime

This may or may not involve self defense in that, using a reasonable degree of force to prevent another from committing a crime could involve preventing an assault, but it could be preventing a crime not involving the use of personal violence.

Defense of property
Some jurisdictions allow force to be used in defense of property, to prevent damage either in its own right, or under one or both of the preceding classes of defense in that a threat or attempt to damage property might be considered a crime (in English law, under s5 Criminal Damage Act 1971 it may be argued that the defendant has a lawful excuse to damaging property during the defense and a defense under s3 Criminal Law Act 1967) subject to the need to deter vigilantes and excessive self-help. Furthermore, some jurisdictions, such as Ohio, allow residents in their homes to use force when ejecting an intruder. The resident merely needs to assert to the court that he felt threatened by the intruder's presence. This defense is not universal: in New Zealand (for example) homeowners have been convicted of assault for attacking burglars.[

Battery (crime)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article is about the crime. For the tortious aspects of battery, see Battery (tort). For other uses of the word "battery", see Battery. The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (December 2010)

Criminal law
Part of the common law series

Element (criminal law)

Actus reus Mens rea Causation Concurrence

Scope of criminal liability

Complicity Corporate Vicarious

Inchoate offenses

Attempt Conspiracy Solicitation

Offence against the person

Assault Battery Homicide crimes Murder Felony murder Manslaughter Negligent homicide Vehicular homicide Crimes against property

Arson Blackmail Burglary Embezzlement Extortion False pretenses Larceny Possessing stolen property Robbery Theft Crimes against justice

Compounding Misprision Obstruction Perjury Malfeasance in office Perverting the course of justice Defenses to liability

Defense of self Defence of property Consent Diminished responsibility Duress Entrapment Ignorantia juris non excusat Infancy Insanity Intoxication defense

Justification Mistake (of law) Necessity Loss of Control (Provocation) Other common law areas

Contracts Evidence Property Torts Wills, trusts and estates Portals

Criminal justice Law

v d e

Battery is a criminal offense involving unlawful physical contact, distinct from assault which is the fear of such contact. In the United States, criminal battery, or simply battery, is the use of force against another, resulting in harmful or offensive contact.[1] It is a specific common law misdemeanor, although the term is used more generally to refer to any unlawful offensive physical contact with another person, and may be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances. Battery was defined at common law as "any unlawful touching of the person of another by the aggressor himself, or by a substance put in motion by him."[2] In most cases, battery is now governed by statute, and its severity is determined by the law of the specific jurisdiction.

Contents
[hide]

1 Generally 2 Specific countries o 2.1 Russia o 2.2 United Kingdom 2.2.1 England and Wales 2.2.1.1 Whether it is a statutory offence 2.2.1.2 Mode of trial and sentence 2.2.2 Scotland o 2.3 United States 2.3.1 Jurisdictional differences 2.3.2 Distinction between battery and assault 3 See also

4 References

[edit] Generally
Specific rules regarding battery vary among different jurisdictions, but some elements remain constant across jurisdictions. Battery generally requires that:
1. an offensive touching or contact is made upon the victim, instigated by the actor; and 2. the actor intends or knows that his action will cause the offensive touching.

Under the Model Penal Code and in some jurisdictions, there is battery when the actor acts recklessly without specific intent of causing an offensive contact. Battery is typically classified as either simple or aggravated. Although battery typically occurs in the context of physical altercations, it may also occur under other circumstances, such as in medical cases where a doctor performs a non-consented medical procedure.

[edit] Specific countries

[edit] Russia
There is an offence which could be (loosely) described as battery in Russia. Article 116 [1] of the Russian Criminal Code provides that battery or similar violent actions which cause pain are an offence.

[edit] United Kingdom

[edit] England and Wales

Battery is an offence under the law of England and Wales. Battery involves unlawfully touching another person (this does not include everyday knocks and jolts to which people silently consent as the result of crowds). No physical injury is necessary. Battery is distinguished from the offence of common assault, where the victim is caused to apprehend the immediate commission of a battery. The terms "battery" and "beat" are not normally used (if at all) in statutory provisions creating offences of aggravated assault. A former exception to this was section 43 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (aggravated assault or battery on a female or a boy under 14). The term "assault" in such provisions generally includes battery. There is no offence called "sexual battery", but the offence of sexual assault involves the nonconsensual sexual touching of another.[3] There is no separate offence relating to incidents of domestic violence, except in the case of death, where the offence of causing or allowing the death of a child or a vulnerable adult may have been committed (s. 5 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004).

Under English law, a battery has only been committed if the correct mens rea (fault element) can be proven. In the case of battery, the mens rea of the offence is intention or recklessness (see R v. Venna [1976] QB 421). A person acts intentionally in terms of a result when his purpose is to cause it and he may be held to act intentionally if he foresees that the result is a virtually certain consequence of his action and he nonetheless acts (see R v. Woollin [1998] 4 All ER 103; although this decision specifically applies to the law of murder, it is generally accepted that this definition of intent applies throughout the criminal law). A person acts recklessly in terms of a result when he is aware of the risk that the result will occur if he acts and he does so act where no reasonable person would (see R v. Cunningham [1957] 2 QB 396).
[edit] Whether it is a statutory offence

In DPP v. Taylor, DPP v. Little [1992] 1 QB 645, 95 Cr.App.R. 28, it was held that battery is a statutory offence, contrary to section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. This decision was criticised[4][5][6] and in Haystead v. DPP 164 JP 396, DC,[7] the Divisional court expressed the obiter opinion that battery remains a common law offence.
[edit] Mode of trial and sentence

In England and Wales, it is a summary offence.[8] However, where section 40 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 applies, it can be an additional charge on an indictment. It is usually tried summarily.[quantify] However if it is tried, it is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or both.[8] See Crown Prosecution Service Sentencing Manual for case law on sentencing (despite the title of the page, the guidance applies to battery as well as common assault). Relevant cases are:

R v. Nottingham Crown Court ex parte Director of Public Prosections [1996] 1 Cr.App.R. (S.) 283 R v. Dunn [2003] 2 Cr.App.R. (S.) 90

[edit] Scotland

There is no distinct offence of battery in Scotland. The offence of assault includes acts that could be described as battery.

[edit] United States

At common law, simple battery is a misdemeanor. The prosecutor must prove all three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. an unlawful application of force 2. to the person of another 3. resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching.

The common-law elements serve as a basic template; but individual jurisdictions may alter them, and they may vary slightly from state to state.

Under modern statutory schemes, battery is often divided into grades that determine the severity of punishment. For example:

Simple battery may include any form of non-consensual harmful or insulting contact, regardless of the injury caused. Criminal battery requires an intent to inflict an injury on another, as distinguished from a tortious battery. Sexual battery may be defined as non-consensual touching of the intimate parts of another. At least in Florida, "Sexual battery means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object": See section 794.011[2]. Family-violence battery may be limited in its scope between persons within a certain degree of relationship: statutes for this offense have been enacted in response to increasing awareness of the problem of domestic violence. Aggravated battery generally is seen as a serious offense of felony grade, involving the loss of the victim's limb or some other type of permanent disfigurement. As successor to the commonlaw crime of mayhem, this is sometimes subsumed in the definition of aggravated assault. In Florida, Aggravated Battery is the intentional commission of great bodily harm. [9] Conversely, if there is no intent in Florida, then it is felony battery which is a third degree felony as opposed to a second degree felony in which aggravated battery is.

[edit] Jurisdictional differences

In some jurisdictions, battery has recently been constructed to include directing bodily secretions at another person without his or her permission. Some of those jurisdictions automatically elevate such a battery to the charge of aggravated battery. In some jurisdictions, the charge of criminal battery also requires evidence of a mental state (mens rea). The terminology used to refer to a particular offense can also vary by jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions, such as New York, refer to what, under the common law, would be battery as assault, and then use another term for the crime that would have been assault, such as menacing.
[edit] Distinction between battery and assault

The overt behavior of an assault might be Person A advancing upon Person B by chasing after him and swinging a fist toward his head. The overt behavior of battery might be A actually striking B. Battery requires (1) a volitional act that (2) results in a harmful or offensive contact with another person and (3) is committed for the purpose of causing a harmful or offensive contact or under circumstances that render such contact substantially certain to occur or with a reckless disregard as to whether such contact will result. Assault is an attempted battery or the act of intentionally placing a person in apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with his or her person. In some places, assault is the threat of violence against another while aggravated assault is the threat with the clear and present ability and willingness to carry it out. Likewise, battery is undesired touching of another, while aggravated battery is touching of another with or without a tool or weapon with attempt to harm or restrain.

[edit] See also

Assault or common assault Assault (tort) Battery (tort) Right of self-defense

[edit] References
1. ^ Black's Law Dictionary Garner, p. 162 2. ^ Clark, William Lawrence; Association, American Bar (1909), Elementary Law, pp. 11718, http://books.google.com/?id=ZmoaAAAAYAAJ, retrieved 2009-08-01 3. ^ The Sexual Offences Act 2003, section 3 4. ^ Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1993 supplements and 1994 and 1996 editions 5. ^ Smith; Hogan, Brian (1999). Criminal Law (9th ed.). London: Butterworths. p. 402. ISBN 0406983836. 6. ^ Smith, J. C. [1991] Crim LR 900 7. ^ http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2000/181.html 8. ^ a b The Criminal Justice Act 1988, section 39 9. ^ "Florida Statute on Aggravated Battery". Florida Legislation. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String= &URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.045.html.

2.Assault (tort)
3. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. Jump to: navigation, search 5. For other uses of the term "Assault", please see Assault (disambiguation). This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2007) In common law, assault is the tort of acting intentionally, that is with either general or specific intent, causing the reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact. Because assault requires intent, it is considered an intentional tort, as opposed to a tort of negligence. Actual ability to carry out the apprehended contact is not necessary. As distinguished from battery, assault need not involve actual contactit only needs intent and the resulting apprehension. However, assault requires more than words alone. For example, wielding a knife while shouting threats could be construed as assault if an apprehension was created. A battery can occur without a preceding assault, such as if a person is struck in the back of the head. Fear is not required, only anticipation of subsequent battery. Three elements must be established in order to establish tortious assault: (1). the plaintiff apprehended immediate physical contact, (2). the plaintiff had reasonable apprehension (the requisite state of mind) and (3). the defendant's act of interference was intentional (the defendant intended the resulting apprehension. But intent for purposes of civil assault can be either general or specific. Specific intent means that when the defendant acted, he or she intended to cause apprehension of a harmful or unwanted contact. General intent means that

the defendant knew with substantial certainty that the action would put someone in apprehension of a harmful or unwanted contact.

While the law varies by jurisdiction, contact is often defined as "harmful" if it objectively intends to injure, disfigure, impair, or cause pain. The act is deemed "offensive" if it would offend a reasonable persons sense of personal dignity. While "imminence" is judged objectively and varies widely on the facts, it generally suggests there is little to no opportunity for intervening acts. Lastly, the state of "apprehension" should be differentiated from the general state of fear, as apprehension requires only that the person be aware of the imminence of the harmful or offensive act. Assault can be justified in situations of self-defence or defence of a third party where the act was deemed reasonable. It can also be justified in the context of a sport where consent can often be implied. In Criminal Law an assault is defined as an attempt to commit battery, requiring the specific intent to cause physical injury.[1]