Assault - cases

Below is a list of cases you should use when answering a scenario question on assault.

Definition: D intends or is subjectively reckless in causing V to apprehend immediate unlawful violence.

Case Name / Facts / One fact to use in an answer / Law that must be used in exam answer
Smith v Woking CC / D frightened V by looking through her bedroom window late at night. V a policewoman was "absolutely terrified, to the extent that she was very nervous and jumpy for a few days afterwards." / Even though D could not attack her at that very moment as he couldn't get in house, her fear was of something sufficiently immediate and violent. / As long as the V believes violence will be used by D in the near future this is a apprehension.
It doesn't matter if D cant/will not attack V straight away.
Causing V’s apprehension of violence is satisfied as long the evidence shows the V believed D would use unlawful violence in the near future.
Logdon v DPP / D showed V, a customs officer, a replica gun that would not fire in a drawer and told her he would hold her prisoner until money owing him was repaid. / As long as V believes violence will take place this is enough for an apprehension.
Why D caused the V to believe this doesn't matter. / A threat of unlawful violence is sufficient as long as V believes them – even if D cant/wont carry out the threat.
R v Ireland / D made a large number of telephone calls to women and remained silent when they answered. A psychiatrist stated that as a result of the repeated telephone calls the V had suffered psychological damage. / An assault might be committed by words or gestures alone, depending on the circumstances; and that where the making of a silent telephone call caused fear of immediate and unlawful violence / An apprehension of immediate force by the V can be committed by the D through:
words or
gestures or
silent phone calls
depending on the circumstances
words or silence are enough for an assault
Case Name / Facts / One fact to use in an answer / Law that must be used in exam answer
Tuberville v Savage 1669 / D struck V causing him to lose an eye. D had placed his hand on his sword and said to V that;
“If it were not assize-time, he would tell him more of his mind.” / By telling the V he would not use unlawful force as the courts were operating in town (assizes) this cancelled the threat of placing his hand on his sword. / An apprehension of immediate force made by the D can be cancelled by the use of words or deeds.
R v Constanza / D followed V, sent her more than 800 letters, telephoned her on numerous occasions, only speaking sometimes, watched her house from his car and wrote on her door. V suffered from a clinical state of depression and anxiety. / Conduct by D accompanying words was capable of making the words an assault. The fear was of violence sufficiently immediate to be described as the fear of immediate violence.
R v Venna / D struggled with the police officers who were arresting him. D fell to the ground and lashed out wildly with his legs, fracturing a bone in the hand of an officer. / The mens rea of Assault is either intention or subjective recklessness as to causing the V to apprehend immediate unlawful violence.
R v Cunningham / The D must foresee the risk of causing the V to apprehend immediate unlawful violence but have taken the risk anyway.

TASK: Fill in any blanks above.