Non-Fatal Offences

• What does assault refer to in non-fatal offences?

  Threatening behavior causing fear of harm
• What is battery in the context of non-fatal offences?

  Unlawful physical contact with another person
• What does s.47 of OAPA 1861 cover?

  Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
• What is defined under s.20 of OAPA 1861?

  Malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm
• What does s.18 of OAPA 1861 entail?

  Intent to cause serious injury or wounding
• What are the criticisms regarding the structure, language, and hierarchy of sentencing in non-fatal offences?

  • Structural complexity and incoherence
  • Archaic and misleading language
  • Illogical hierarchy of sentencing
  • Same maximum sentence for s.47 and s.20
• Why is the structure of OAPA 1861 considered confusing?

  Frequent amendments have made it incoherent
• What does JC Smith argue about the language used in non-fatal offences?

  Lawyers are likely to make mistakes
• How does the hierarchy of sentencing for s.47 and s.20 appear illogical?

  Both have the same maximum sentence despite severity
• What is Professor Clarkson's view on sentencing differentials?

  Sentencing differentials are not justified
• What are the criticisms related to the Actus Reus (AR) and Mens Rea (MR) in non-fatal offences?

  • Lack of correspondence between AR and MR
  • s.47 seen as 'half mens rea'
  • Unjust imprisonment for minor MR
  • Broad definition of 'wound'
  • Clarity issues in consent as a defense
• Why is s.47 criticized as a 'crime of half mens rea'?

  MR is not required for the injury caused
• What is the issue with the term 'wound' in s.20 and s.18?

  'Wound' covers various injury seriousness levels
• What is the problem with the MR of s.18 regarding intent?

  It treats different intents as equal
• What inconsistencies exist in the allowance of consent as a defense?

  Clarity in consent reasons is lacking
• What are the proposed reforms in the Law Commission Report 2015?

  • Clause 1: Intentionally causing serious injury
  • Clause 2: Recklessly causing serious injury
  • Clause 3: Intentionally/recklessly causing injury
  • Clause 4: Assault with two separate offences
• What would replace s.18 according to the reforms?

  Intentionally causing serious injury
• What is the maximum sentence for recklessly causing serious injury under the reforms?

  Seven years
• How do the reforms aim to address criticisms of the current law?

  By codifying and updating definitions and patterns
• How do the proposed reforms improve the legal framework for non-fatal offences?

  • Clearer moral basis for sentencing
  • Better reflection of physical and mental health issues
  • Modern language and logical structure
  • Clear distinction of injury levels and MR
• What problems would remain even after the proposed reforms?

  Some inconsistencies and ambiguities may persist
• What conclusion can be drawn regarding the need for reform in non-fatal offences?

  • Current law is in need of reform
  • Reforms would enhance clarity and fairness
  • Law should be fit for purpose in modern society