Criminal Justice Act 1988, s39:Common assault and batter shall be summary offences and a person guilty of either of them shall be liable to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both.
examples: grazes,scratches, abrasions, minor bruisings, swellings, reddening of the skin, superficial cuts, 'black eye(s)'. --CPS charging standards
Collins v. Wilcock (1984)Two police saw two women and thought that they were hookers. When copper girl asked slut girl to get into the car for questioning, she walked away. She persued her, wanting to verify her identity and hence caution her about the Street Offences Act 1959. When she tried to walk away again, she took hold of her arm, and slut girl scratched her with her fingernails.
Maggie's question to Queen's Bench Division:
1. Was it within the duty of the police to detain the woman against her will to ask her about her identity?
2. Did her conduct lead the constable to believe that she may have been soliciting men?
Robert
Goof Goff LJ:
Assault: an act which causes another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful, force on his person
Battery: Actual infliction of unlawful force on another person.
Touching of another person, however slight, may amount to battery.
Blackstone:"the law cannot draw the line between different degrees of violence, and therefore totally prohibits the first and lowest stage of it; every man's person being sacred, and no other having a right to meddle with it, in any the slightest manner".
Exceptions: Children getting reasonable punishment, lawful arrest, reasonable force.
GENERALLY consent is a defence to battery->
Tuberwell v. Savage(1669): A guy was slapped on the back during a party. No grounds for complaint.
Touching a person for the purpose of engaging his attention with reasonable degree is also ok.
Wiffin v. Kincard (1807): Touch by constable's staff on the shoulder of a man who climbed up a gentleman's railing to have a view of a mad ox is not battery.
BUT there's a distinction between drawing a man's attention and physical restraint.
The test for acceptable physical contact will depend on the facts of the particular case. In this case, the police had no greater rights than ordinary citizens. BUT she has an existing duty as a police and may take extra steps to prevent or investigate a crime (
Donelly v. Jackman 1970).
Examples of unlawful conduct:
-Kenlin v Gardiner (1966) Catching hold of 2 schoolboys for detainment and questioning instead of arrest
-Ludlow v. Burgess (1971) serious interference with the citizen's liberty
-Bentley v. Brudzinski (1982) a policeman placed his right hand on D's shoulder; part of the course of conduct in which the officer was attempting to detain D.
BACK TO THE CASE:
s.2 of the Street Offences Act 1959 gives police the power to caution women found loitering or soliciting. But it does not allow them to stop and detain women for the purpose of giving caution. Copper girl's action of grabbing hold of slut girl's arm was unlawful, because it went beyond the generally acceptable conduct of touching a person to get (her) attention. Copper girl's act constituted a battery on slut girl.
Also, if a police reinforces a detainment (willing or unwilling) with force or a threat to use force if the person does not comply, it would be unlawful. Force: battery, Threat to use force: false imprisonment.
The second question left unanswered. Too widely drafted to be answered simply.
Appeal Allowed. Conviction Quashed.
+++
In totally law unrelated news:
Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. Why am I not suprised? And the father wasn't even her boyfriend. Now he's taking the heat for the baby. I wonder how much he was paid.
