Battery

Battery – Actus Reus Ireland; Burstow – AR = Application of unlawful physical force to another

Actus Reus – the Force Force can be slight V does not need to suffer any pain or injury Collins v Willcock – “any touching of another person, however slight, may amount to battery” E.g – slap, kiss, throwing a drink over someone Thomas – touching clothes amounted to battery Fagan – can be a continuing act – applying unlawful force by driving on to police officer’s foot – by leaving the car there meant the unlawful force continued up until the time D had mens rea

Actus Reus - Unlawful Force Fact that V hasn’t consented usually makes the force unlawful Some force may be lawful: If victim consents to the force Sports such as Rugby Surgical procedures, visits to the dentist If V doesn’t consent: Acting in self-defence Police officers using force in the prevention of a crime – but only so far as the law deems it necessary - Collins v Wilcock – police officer who took hold of woman’s arm was not arresting her so this amounted to battery Everyday physical contact Collins v Willcock – all those who move about society have given implied consent to the physical contacts of ordinary life as they have exposed themselves to bodily contact – e.g. jostling in a supermarket/underground station, hand seized in friendship at a party (or even a back slap within reason) But – if contact exceeds what is generally held to be acceptable (hand squeezed tightly at length until it hurts, repeatedly slapping someone on the back) force may be unlawful

Actus Reus – Indirect Batteries Battery can be inflicted indirectly DPP v K – battery can be indirect – schoolboy put acid in a hot air drier and another pupil was injured Haystead – man punched a woman who dropped her baby – battery on the baby – D had used the woman as a weapon to injure the baby (n.b would also be liable under transferred malice – see below)

Actus Reus – Omissions Must be an act unless there is a duty to act, in which case it can be an omission. Santana-Bermudez – D was asked, but failed to inform police officer searching him that he had a hypodermic needle in his pocket. Officer injured – failure to tell Officer about needle amounted to the AR of battery

Mens Rea Venna – MR = Intent or subjective recklessness to apply force to another D must intend or see the risk of unlawful force being applied to another Don’t need any intent or recklessness as to harm – only the unlawful force Latimer – transferred malice – D intentionally hit A with a belt, belt rebounded and hit B, D had MR for the attack on A which was transferred to B. Transferred malice only applies where MR and AR are for the same crime

Battery Questions 1.Was there force? What was it? 2.Was the force unlawful? – (Any issue of indirect battery or omission?) 3.Did D intend or was he subjectively reckless to apply force? – (any issue of transferred malice?)