Assault Battery and Crimes Against Persons
Assault Battery and Crimes Against Persons
Crimes of Assault and crimes of battery vary in the similarities and differences they possess. They are likely combined when it involves conviction against a person. It is easy to assume that the two are one. Assault embodies injury and/or contact to someone else. Assault is the fear that is created by intimidating or demonstrating the ability to carry out a threat against someone. All the while, Battery is the infliction of harm on someone after a threat has been made.
Battery is the actual action of harm against someone else. A very important feature of battery is the intent to harm or the acting “on purpose” that will cause harm on someone. The degrees of battery vary in the types depending on the seriousness of the crime. They vary in severity from just simple battery, domestic violence, and sexual battery. These three are considered misdemeanors.
Another form of battery is aggravated battery. This type can be easily classified as a felony. Battery may include “any non-consensual, insulting, or harmful contact, regardless of the damage was done (Champion, 2015).” In Domestic violence, there involves violence between a pair (couple). Sexual battery is classified as any non-consensual physical contact that is sexual as represented by nature. An example of an assault is when a person makes a threat towards another person in an attempt to do harm. A man in the grocery store takes the last bag of Ruffle chips. As he was grabbing for the bag, another customer dashes for them as well. The man verbally tells the other man that he would punch him in his face if he puts his hands on his chips. The one man has assaulted to other in the fact that he is making a threat to do bodily harm to him. If the dispute turns physical and the man actually punches the other man in the face then he has then committed a crime of battery. It is important to note that jurisdiction plays a huge role in determining punishment for a crime of battery or assault. In the given situation, the jurisdiction of the crime should not be a factor when considering whether or not the criminal should be charged for battery. There was an intent to create fear when he jumped in front of her and dragged her into the alley. There was most definitely an act of physical harm when he strikes her and rips off her clothes. Jurisdiction, in this case, should not be considered when there is actual evidence of the intent to create fear and the act of harm done upon another person. His actions should be punish as the actions of man committing battery.
When making the determination of whether an act was consensual one must understand the term in its entirety. As defined in the Laws of violence, consensual “the voluntary agreement of all people involved (Archey, 2009).” If the victim had gone willingly to the alley and laid down on her own without being forced, then the thought of consensual may have come into play. It could possibly show interest in the assailant rather than fear. “Initiating sexual actions without approval is classified sexual assault or rape.” (Archey, 2009)
Indicative in the scenario, the victim was in fact dragged into the alley and her clothes were in fact ripped, this alone shows that she was not a willing participate in this crime. She was then stricken, and in her defense she hit the attacker and was able to run away. In retrospect to false imprisonment, this attack would indeed fall within those grounds. There was an unlawful restraint. In my opinion, if this was an open and close case of consensual touching then the court could not convict the attacker, but this was not the case. There is evidence of false imprisonment and also evidence where the victim had to use a form of self-defense to save herself from the attack.
Because false imprisonment is restraining a person against their will, there is a deprivation of their freedom of movement. If the defendant is unable to show legal justification for the detention, plaintiff is compensated, even if the confinement period was brief (Jackson, 1976). In the case of kidnapping, a person is forced from one place to another against their will, but it does not necessarily constrict their freedom of movement. In a kidnapping case, there could definitely be evidence to suggest false imprisonment was involved. But, the fact still remains that false imprisonment does not involve the act of relocation of a victim. Kidnapping is especially a more heinous crime because they are being taken against their will to a location unknown to them and not within their comfort zone. Kidnapping, also, has levels of degrees.
Even if it is noted that the two have a romantic linkage, the actions of the attacker are not justified under this. He has still created fear by jumping out and dragging her in to the alley, and he has still committed a crime of slapping her and ripping off her clothes which is apparently not wanted because of the counter attack.
Archey, J. (2000). The laws of violence.
Champion, D. R. (2015). Assault and battery. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
Jackson, I. R. (1976). NEW CLASS OF PLAINTIFFS IN FALSE IMPRISONMENT
ACTIONS. California Law Review, 64(2), 602.
Place an Order