Battery 0.0 / 5 ? LawCriminal lawA2/A-levelAQA Created by: Hayleyginny2345Created on: 17-11-13 16:11 Actus Reus The application of unlawful force 1 of 21 Collins V Wilcock No need to prove harm or pain the merest touch is enough (police prostitute) 2 of 21 Minor injuries / scratches = Battery 3 of 21 Case Wilson v Pringle 4 of 21 Unlawful meaning When the victim has not consented to the force 5 of 21 Force may be through a continuing act Fagan (police mans foot) 6 of 21 Merest touch eg touching of clothes is enough Thomas (skirt) 7 of 21 Indirect battery Isn't accepted in Wilson and Savage as no direct force 8 of 21 Disproved in Haystead (no force applied to baby yet still battery) 9 of 21 Herring states Irrelevant what means are used for application of force so as long as it's there 10 of 21 Hostile Force has to be hostile according to Wilson v Pringle 11 of 21 However, Faulkner v Talbot state it doesnt have to be hostile 12 of 21 If unlawful = hostile (Brown 13 of 21 Santa Bermudez state Omission is significant but only when there is a duty to act 14 of 21 What happened in Santa Bermudez Police officer got stabbed in finger with heroin neadle after searching suspect) 15 of 21 Mens Rea = Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force 16 of 21 Case Venna 17 of 21 Defendant must realise what The risk of physical contact and take that risk 18 of 21 Transferred malice Can be liable for battery through transfered malice 19 of 21 case latimer (belt) 20 of 21 Reckless cunningham 21 of 21
Comments
No comments have yet been made