Building 13 Room 3019

May it please your Lordship, I, Jay Johnson, appear on behalf of the junior counsel
for the appellant in this case
With regards to the second ground of appeal the issue is whether the jury were
misdirected on the law relating to assault occasioning actual bodily harm under
section 47 of the offences against the person act 1861.
Without prejudice to my learned seniors submission; should my Lords not be
swayed by his submission I respectfully submit that the law in this area to be
modified in order to minimise injustice.
First Submission: No Assault committed
Assault is committed where the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the
victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence
Aware assault can be committed through words but in this case there was no
intention to do so
It was simply a verbal exchange between the two parties. Mr Plank just answered
a question
I am now going to refer you to the highlighted section on page 3 in the case of
the Crown and Roberts which can be found in volume 56 of the criminal appeal
reports for the year 1972, page 95.
Summary of facts
LJ Stephenson stated: Robertss version is, we were arguing. I had nothing to do
with her jumping out of the car. It was merely the result of a verbal battle. She
suddenly opened the door and before I could do anything she had gone If that
be right, there was no assault. Certainly you would acquit on that charge.
This can be related - verbal battle - obiter applied - no assault - appeal allowed.
Second Submission:
I submit to you my lord that in this case the injuries of Mr Walker were not
brought about by any decision made by the defendant.
I am now going to refer you to the highlighted section on page 4 in the case of
the crown and Blaue which can be found in volume 1 of the Weekly Law Reports
for the year 1975, page 1411.
Summary of facts
LJ Lawton stated: The death of the defendant had not been brought about by
any decision made by the deceased but by the stab wound
Distinguished - injuries due to the victims weakness - fainting easily.
Victim knew - fainted easily - not have challenged A - no challenge - no fainted.
No offence, no intention/decision to assault - not see that risk fainting.
Only verbal exchange caused Mr Walker to faint.
Third Submission:
My lord if you were to dismiss this appeal it would open up a range of situations
in which people could be convicted of assault and ABH If conversations caused
faint, due weakness or otherwise
Go against liberal society could infringe right of freedom of expression under HRA
1988.
If law modified setting the precedent in this case enable people to feel safer if
argue with someone mean not charged with assault or ABH if person faints as a
result of the exchange.
End:

Building 13 Room 3019

For these reasons, my LORD/LADY and those by my lower counsel I submit that
this appeal should be
Perhaps there are some issues on which I may be of further assistance?
I am obliged, My Lord.