On February 24, 1992, the appellant, Mike Chan-Fook was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to s.47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The appellant denied that any physical harm was received by the victim. The victim had jumped out of the window as an attempt to escape but had received injuries. It was argued that the victim’s mental state was altered by fear and panic due to the appellant’s actions towards him. This led the victim to jump out of the window and receive a fractured wrist and a dislocated hipbone. The legal issue that we need to find in this case is if there was assault occasioning actual bodily harm and whether the mental state effects actual bodily harm. The judge in court convicted the appellant of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. In the appeal, the judge criticised judge Bernard Charles for letting the jury decide whether the appellant was guilty or not. Another issue that must be resolved is to figure out whether the appellant was responsible for altering the student’s state of mind, which leads to the respondent’s psychiatric injuries. In a court of law the state of mind itself, cannot be deemed as proof for psychiatric …show more content…
The first one being that there must be an “assault,” meaning technical assault or a battery. Secondly, this assault must “occasion” or cause actual bodily harm. One example of this is the Reg v Roberts case. The defendant tried to pull a girl’s coat off in a moving car. She had jumped out of the car and was injured. This comes out to be actual bodily harm. Lastly, the assault must cause “actual bodily harm.” This means that it must interfere with the person’s health or
In the state of New Columbia, Alex Billings has accused CJ Pearson, previously a friend, of intentional infliction of emotional distress. This all started because CJ invited Alex to a “Go-go” and Alex wore a weird outfit. (30) All of the “distress” happened over text, on MyFace, and in person with comments that Pearson intended as jokes. CJ Pearson is not guilty of intentional infliction of emotional distress because one, he did not meet all of the requirements in his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) test that the erudite professor gave him; and two, Alex Billings might have had another motive for staying home from school.
excessive force cases brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. BYU Journal of Public Law, 26(1),
Criminal Code s.230(a) “one who intends on causing bodily harm for the purpose of (i) actually committing the offence, or (ii) planning his escape after committing or attempting to commit the offence, and the death derives from the bodily harm;” (Criminal Code of Canada)
The crime of indecent assault and battery occurs when an attacker, has non-consensual physical contact with a person in a sexual manner. This could be any unwarranted physical contact to a person’s private body. This assault is punishable to up to five years in prison.
In the article “The Mentally Ill Are Mishandled by the Justice System”, Shannon explains how there are approximately 3000 mentally ill inmates in a prison who are unjustfuly sent there. Many mental illnesses are cause by post traumatic experiences such as being abused as a child or being sexually abused as a child. She also explains how many times judges and officers do not fully understand why mentally ill people do what they do, therefore they misunderstand the person’s actions and send them.
When describing a physical altercation between two adults, the term is assault and battery. Assault on an individual has more than immediate effects; the effects can last a lifetime in severe cases. In all fifty states, it is a crime to hit, strike or use corporal punishment in any deliberate manner towards any person over the age of eighteen. However, this law does not apply to physical force being used on minors. Spanking, whipping, and paddling are among a few common references to this form of punishment. Physically disciplining children has had many names over the years. No matter which term is used, corporal punishment has a negative impact on every party involved. It is a widely used, socially accepted method of discipline. “Approximately 94% of three and four-year old children have been spanked in the past year (Slade & Winssow 1321). Although spanking is a widespread practice, it is becoming more controversial. The negative effects of spanking greatly outweigh the benefits. Spanking is a socially tolerated view promoting abusive patterns, and has a negative psychological impact in teaching children that pain, fear, and confusion promote conformability.
Assault is an intentional or reckless act that causes someone to put in fear of immediate physical harm, e.g. pointing a gun at the claimant by the defendant, the claimant need not know if the gun is real one. Assault must be intentional, direct and immediate. Battery is the intentional or reckless application of physical force to another person. While, false imprisonment is an unlawful restriction of the claimant’s freedom of movement by the defendant.
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28. (2000): 315-324. Web. The Web. The Web. 13 Apr 2011.
This paper will view some of the characteristics and violent behavior risk factors associated with a depressed or mentally ill person. It will also, compare characteristic that characterize a person suffering form depression or a person that is mentally ill. This paper will discuss treatment or punishment debated concerning depression and mental illness in the justice system. Existing studies will be used to help in the study of depression and mental illness from different sources. Depression and Violence Depression, according to Webster (1988), is a psychotic condition marked by an inability to concentrate and feelings of dejection and quilt."(p.364) Depression is most commonly treatable with counseling, but what happens when counseling fail? Although our current mental health system is not perfect it has been able to bring us where we are today.
Seltzer, T., 2005, ‘Mental health courts – A misguided attempt to address the criminal justice system’s unfair treatment of people with mental illnesses’, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 570-586.
suddenly jumps in front of her and drags her into an alley. The attacker strikes (A) and rips her clothes. Fortunately, (A) hits the attacker with a rock and runs to safety. The man’s actions do not amount to assault, they amount to a battery as he dragged the woman to an alley, stroke her, and ripped her clothes off with the intent of causing her harm. The acts of the woman are a measure of self-defense, and she cannot be held accountable for the infliction she may have induced to the man. If the man just followed her without having any physical contact with her, his actions would have constituted to assault, as he would inflict fear into the
Silver, Eric. 2006. “Understanding the Relationship between Mental Disorder and Violence: The Need for a Criminological Perspective.” Law and Human Behavior 30(6):685-706.
It stands that under law, if a defendant can past the five elements of proving their attacker as dangerous and a threat, then no criminal charges will be filed against them (National Paralegal College,
Insanity, automatism and diminished responsibility all play a significant role in cases where the defendant’s mind is abnormal while committing a crime. The definition of abnormal will be reviewed in relationship to each defence. In order to identify how these three defences compare and contrast, it is first important to understand their definition and application. The appropriate defence will be used once the facts of the cases have been distinguished and they meet the legal tests. The legal test of insanity is set out in M’Naghten’s Case: “to establish a defence…of insanity it must be clearly proved that, at the time of committing the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.” To be specific, the defect of reason arises when the defendant is incapable of exercising normal reasoning. The defect of reason requires instability in reasoning rather than a failure to exercise it at a time when exercise of reason is possible. In the case of R v Clarke, the defendant was clinically depressed and in a moment of absent-mindedness, stole items from a supermarket...
Teff, H. (1998) Liability for Negligently Inflicted Psychiatric Harm: Justifications and Boundaries, The Cambridge Law Journal 57,1, 92