Response To Mock's Essay (OAPA)
A2 LAW – ANSWER TO ASSIGNMENT 3.12
a) Aswina threw a dish at Celia breaking one of her teeth. The most likely charge here would be assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), under S47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA).
ABH is a triable either way offence that could be tried in either the magistrates or Crown court. It carries a maximum punishment of 5 years in prison. The actus reus is either that the defendant committed the actus reus of assault or battery and that the assault or battery caused actual bodily harm.
Assault is a common law offence, the actus reus of which is causing the victim to fear unlawful force. Therefore, if Moby saw the fist coming and thought he would be hit the actus reus would be satisfied for …show more content…
However, she may be able to raise the defence of intoxication through alcohol. The success of such a defence however depends whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary. In both cases the court would firstly consider whether the intoxication took away the mens rea. In Kingston (1994) the defendant was attracted to young boys but controlled it. His friends spiked his drinks and set him up with a young boy to blackmail him. Kingston indecently assaulted the boy but at his trial stated that although he intended to do it he would not have done it had he not been drunk. The House of Lords however, upheld his conviction and refused his defence as he had intent and drunken intent was still intent and therefore he had the mens rea.
In Aswina’s case she would be claiming involuntary intoxication and therefore has the evidential burden which means she must bring in some evidence of the involuntary intoxication and its effect on her mens rea. The legal burden then passes to the prosecution to disprove her claim beyond reasonable doubt.
Involuntary intoxication, if successful, is a complete defence to all crimes and can be incurred in one of three
a) Aswina threw a dish at Celia breaking one of her teeth. The most likely charge here would be assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), under S47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA).
ABH is a triable either way offence that could be tried in either the magistrates or Crown court. It carries a maximum punishment of 5 years in prison. The actus reus is either that the defendant committed the actus reus of assault or battery and that the assault or battery caused actual bodily harm.
Assault is a common law offence, the actus reus of which is causing the victim to fear unlawful force. Therefore, if Moby saw the fist coming and thought he would be hit the actus reus would be satisfied for …show more content…
However, she may be able to raise the defence of intoxication through alcohol. The success of such a defence however depends whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary. In both cases the court would firstly consider whether the intoxication took away the mens rea. In Kingston (1994) the defendant was attracted to young boys but controlled it. His friends spiked his drinks and set him up with a young boy to blackmail him. Kingston indecently assaulted the boy but at his trial stated that although he intended to do it he would not have done it had he not been drunk. The House of Lords however, upheld his conviction and refused his defence as he had intent and drunken intent was still intent and therefore he had the mens rea.
In Aswina’s case she would be claiming involuntary intoxication and therefore has the evidential burden which means she must bring in some evidence of the involuntary intoxication and its effect on her mens rea. The legal burden then passes to the prosecution to disprove her claim beyond reasonable doubt.
Involuntary intoxication, if successful, is a complete defence to all crimes and can be incurred in one of three