Assault Model Answer

• Prima facie, the defendant (state name), could be charged with the common law offence of assault for (state what happened). Assault is a summary offence tried in the Magistrates Court and is defined in R v Venna/Ireland as 'intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate, unlawful, personal violence.'
• The actus reus (AR) of assault is causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence and this must be by an act not an omission. The act could be done by words (R v Constanza), actions (R v Smith) or both words and actions (R v Lewis). No physical contact is necessary.
• The act or words must cause the victim to apprehend that immediate force is going to be used against them. If the victim is not in fear then this cannot be an assault (R v Lamb). It doesn't matter if the defendant has no intention of actually carrying out their threat as long as the victim believes they will (R v Logdon). Also, if the defendant's words indicate that no violence will be used this also cannot amount to an assault as the victim would know no violence will be used and the words have negated the assault (Tuberville v Savage).
• Immediate means the force must be 'imminent' (soon) not 'instantaneous' (straight away) (Smith v Woking police station) but if there is no chance that force can be used on the victim imminently then it won't be an assault.
• As assault is a result crime, causation must be proven. Factual causation will be established using the 'but for' test and the defendant's actions caused the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence (R v White)
• Legal causation must also be proven. The defendant will be de minimis (R v Kimsey) if they are more than a minimal cause and the operating and substantial cause if they are the most to blame (R v Smith).
• Check for new intervening acts:

  1. Victim's own actions - reasonable, foreseeable and not daft = no break (Roberts)
  2. Victim's self-neglect -not to go hospital, acts against hospital advice (R v Holland) or commits suicide (R v Wallace) = no break
  3. Actions of a 3rd party - reasonable, foreseeable = no break (R v Pagett)
  4. Palpably wrong medical treatment - palpably wrong if it so independent from the defendant's actions that it is a mere part of history = break (R v Jordan), no break (R v Smith).
  5. Thin skull rule - take your victim as you find them = no break (R v Blaue)
• The mens rea (guilty mind) of assault is that D intends or is reckless about causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence (Venna/Ireland).
• Intention is where the defendant has the aim, purpose and desire to bring about the prohibited consequence (R v Mohan). Subjective recklessness is where the defendant foresees a risk and proceeds to take it anyway (R v Cunningham).
• On that basis, the defendant has/has not the AR and MR of assault and would be guilty subject to any defence. If convicted, could face up to a maximum of 6 months in prison and/or a £5,000 fine as contained in s.39 of the Criminal and Justice Act 1988.