This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Uncategorized

Non-Fatal Offences Evaluation

Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.

Any subject. Any type of essay. We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.

GET YOUR PRICE

writers online

Non-Fatal Offences Evaluation

Introduction

There has been much debate on the law that surrounds non-fatal offences and there has been a unanimous acceptance that urgent reforms are required. The Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA 1861), was written with an aim of bringing common law together as to form statute. It contained rules that were neither logic nor consistent, which led to its heavy criticism. The Law Commission gave a description of the OAPA 1861 as not efficient.

Assault

There is confusion surrounding the concise meaning of assault. For instance, the Criminal Justice Act 1988, Section 39 says it is common assault and battery while section 40 says it is just common assault. The offence has only been classified but not given a statutory definition.       Section 20 defines the offence as inflicting grievous bodily harm, in comparison to section 18 that states causing instead of inflicting. Initially, Inflict and cause had different meanings as inflict required either an assault or a battery. The case of Burstow (1997), established that they both mean the same without necessary requirement of either battery or assault.

The OAPA 1861, also does not give a clear definition of wounding. In JCC v Eisenhower (1994) stated that it involves breaking of the skin. According to CPS charging standards, there should be more minor offences charged in section 47, as the guidelines are not binding. Cunningham (1957) interpreted malicious to mean reckless, which simply translates to bad motive.

Sentencing

The Act is not consistent in providing sentences for offences. It provides different sentences for each offence. The offences of assault and battery both have the same sentencing under section 20 and 47, which is 5 years maximum imprisonment. Section 20 and 18 provide for life imprisonment and a maximum of 5 years for battery and assault respectively even though the harm that has happened is quite same.

Outdated

The judges have previously been forced to use modern examples. For example, Ireland was used for silent phone calls, Smith was used for the application in cases of harassment and and Dica was used in the cases of sexually transmitted diseases.

Actus Reus

Just like in the others, the statute does not give a clear definition of the term. In section 18 and 20, wounding is defined as a type of injury that is not level. Assault has been widely defined as per Smith, Ireland.

 

Works Cited

The Offences Against The Persons Act, 1861.

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask