Flashcards
Defences to Assault
Cards in this deck (19)
- 1When is consent a defence to assault?Only will be a defence when it is for minor battery, such as pushing and shoving on the train.
- 2What situations can ABH or GBH be in the public's interest?Rough horseplay
Sport
Medical intervention
Bodily adornments (tattoos, piercings, cosmetics)
Religious flagellation
Dangerous exhibitions
Males circumcision - 3What situations are not in the public's interest?Fighting
Harm inflicted during sex
Female circumcision
Consent gained fraudulently - 4Rough horseplay R v Jones [1986]School boys tossed 2 others 10 feet into the air, they had not consented as they were running away.
Broken arm.
Playground pranks, tolerance towards male playful violence.
Appeal succeeded. - 5Rough horseplay R v Aitkens [1992]RAF officers, drunk, set fire to a fellow officer in a fire-retardant suit, seriously burnt.
This was what happened normally when a someone passed their tests to become a Pilot.
They had a genuine (though drunken) belief in V's consent.
Appeal succeeded. - 6Dangerous ExhibitionsWould be in the Public's interest if it was for entertainment that went wrong.
- 7Religious FlagellationIn the Public's interest.
- 8Sports What does Foster Crown Law [1792] say?Sports, especially physical sports have long been held as “Manly diversions, they intend to give strength, skill, and activity, and may fit people for defence, public as well as personal, in a time of need”.
- 9Sports?Participation in games and sports are deemed to have been implicitly consented to the level of conduct, and risk of injury, that their sport allows, within the rules. This is even true of boxing, where the whole point of the sport is to hit each other.
- 10Sports R v Barns [2005]During an amateur football match, D seriously injured the leg of an opponent with a late and reckless tackle. Convicted of s.20 GBH on the basis that what he had done was not legitimate sport.
He was cleared on appeal on the basis that his actions may have been "an instinctive reaction, error, or misjudgment in the heat of the game.
State of mind in D must be taken into account. - 11Fighting AG's reference (no.6 of 1980)Two men decided to have a fight to settle an argument, which caused ABH.
Held was not in the Public's interest to be allowed to cause ABH or GBH in public or private.
However, this does not take away the legality of properly conducted games and sports, surgery and dangerous exhibitions. - 12Private Consensual Sex R v Brown [1993]Sado-Masochistic homosexual group who filmed genital torture and other sexual violence.
Held: consent was no defence in this case, this did not include on the list of those of the public's interest. - 13Private Consensual Sex R v Wilson [1996]Branded his wife at request.
Charged and convicted with ABH.
Conviction quashed as she consented to it, drew no sexual satisfaction from it, and was a personal adornment like a tattoo. - 14Private Consentual Sex Slingsby [1995]Penetration of anus of V during consensual sex, D was wearing a ring, caused small cuts (unknown to both)
Cuts became infected, she later died of septicemia.
Convicted of UAM.
Appeal successful, not MR for assault.
So if during sex injury is intended or foreseen as a risk, then consent does not equal a defence. - 15When will consent gained fraudulently usually negate consent?Fraud regarding
the nature of the act (what)
the identity of the actor (who)
the quality of the act (why) - 16Richardson [1998]D, a dentist was suspended but continued to practice.
There was no fraud as the patients knew who she was, what she was doing, and consented to it. - 17Tabassum [2000]T persuaded women to have their breast examined, they consented in the belief T had medical qualifications (which he did not)
They consented to the nature of the act but not the quality, they consented to touching for medical purposes, but no for indecent behavior.
Fraud to why it happened. - 18Dica [2004]knew he was HIV positive, had unprotected sex with two women, both become infected.
Convicted of GBH, they had no reason to believe there was a risk.
If V consented knowing D's condition and the risk, then no liability for D.
What if he intended to infect them, but V consented, Brown [1993] states consent would provide no defence. - 19Konzani [2005]D knew he was HIV positive, had unprotected sex with 3 women without telling them. Convicted with GBH for them contracting HIV.
They claimed V's had consented to all the risk involved, rejected. They consented to the usual risks of sexual intercourse, they had no reason to believe they were consenting to a fatal disease.
Information
- Description
- Degree Criminal Law (Defence to Assault) Flashcards on Defences to Assault, created by James Dolton on 03/04/2017.
- Created by
- James Dolton
- Views
- 1
- Rating