Assault and the Law

Common assault (covered by s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988) is when a person inflicts violence on someone else (battery, or ‘the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force to another person’) or makes them think they are going to be attacked.

Common assault does not have to involve physical violence (see Melbreak Huntsman Christopher Nixon convicted of assault). Threatening words, miming the act of hitting, punching, or kicking a victim, running a finger across a throat, or making a threat or a racist comment is enough for the crime to have been committed provided the victim fears that they are about to be attacked.

Deliberately spitting at someone is also common assault.

According to Ask the Police, “In most cases, spitting at a person deliberately will constitute an offence of assault. However, if it is accidental it will not usually be deemed to be an offence. An exception to this may be where someone intended to spit at a person, but missed and spat at another person nearby. Despite not being intentional, this may be considered to be a reckless act and the offence may still be committed.”

Actual bodily harm (ABH) means the assault has caused some hurt or injury to the victim.

Physical injury does not need to be serious or permanent but must be more than “trifling” or “transient”, which means it must at least cause minor injuries or pain or discomfort. Psychological harm can also be covered by this offence, but this must be more than just fear or anxiety.

Grievous bodily harm (GBH) means the assault has caused ‘serious physical harm’.

Life-changing injuries should always be charged as GBH, but the harm or damage does not necessarily have to be permanent or dangerous. A broken bone would amount to GBH – in some cases a broken bone might lead to permanent disability but, in others, it might heal without leaving any long-term effects.

GBH can also include psychiatric injury (or someone passing on an infection, for example through sexual activity).

Verbal assault is an intentional threat by word to do violence to another person, coupled with an apparent ability to carry out the threat, while creating a well-founded fear in the other person that such violence is imminent without subjecting him or her to physical attack.

When people talk about ‘being assaulted’ or ‘an assault’ they are usually talking about battery. Battery is committed when a person intentionally and recklessly applies unlawful force to another – so can include pushing or shoving. 

Battery can include instances in which a person is pushed, slapped or even spat at.

Battery is a time-limited offence and must be charged within six months.

A “wound” means a break in the continuity of the whole skin. The definition of ‘wounding’ may encompass injuries that are relatively minor in nature, for example a small cut or laceration.

The injuries involved in a wounding can be less serious than those in GBH, but note that wounding requires that the victim’s skin is broken, either on their body or their inner skin (for example, inside their lip).

It does not include the rupture of blood vessels – so bruising alone would not amount to wounding.

The offence of assault with a weapon is often referred to as ‘assault with intent to cause serious harm’ or ‘assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.’ It is an offence under Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and is punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

To be convicted of this offence, a person must have intentionally or recklessly caused injury to another person using a weapon or other object that was capable of causing serious harm. The weapon does not have to be something we might typically think of as a ‘weapon’ like a knife or gun but can be any object that is used to cause injuries, such as a glass bottle and of course a vehicle (and ‘vehicle’ includes a quad bike).

The offence of assault with a weapon requires a specific intent to cause serious harm or grievous bodily harm, which means that the defendant must have acted intending to cause such harm or with the knowledge that it was likely to result from their actions.

If the prosecution is unable to prove this specific intent, the defendant may be charged with a lesser offence such as common assault or battery.

Hunts seem to routinely use their horses to ‘move’ sabs and monitors out of the way and – more rarely – to cause serious injuries and harm.

We have been unable to find a specific offence in law that applies only to horses, though, and going by past examples (two of which are listed below), it is the severity of any injury caused and the intent, and not the fact that a horse has been used, that determines the offence. 

A ‘nudge’ with a horse therefore might be considered to be a ‘shove’ equivalent of ‘battery’ (and still worth recording or reporting to any police present at the hunt), but ‘trampling’ might amount to a charge of Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) under Section 18 or Section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. (The categorisation of GBH is not determined by the severity of the injury incidentally. Both the level of injury for Section 20 and Section 18 GBH is the same, the difference lies in intent: Section 18 GBH is Inflicting GBH or wounding with intent to cause GBH, while Section 20 GBH is inflicting GBH or wounding without intent to cause GBH.)

Two recent examples of causing GBH with a horse include:

• Chris Mardles pleading guilty to GBH after trampling a sab with his horse (Mardles was the whipper-in of the Pytchley with Woodland Hunt at the time of the incident in September 2020).
• Mark Doggrell, a huntsman with the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hunt who trampled Mel Broughton and was charged with recklessly causing GBH (interestingly Doggrell was originally told he would not be prosecuted but the Crown Prosecution Service decided to press charges ‘in the public interest’).

Assault with intent to resist arrest is committed when a person assaults another person with intent to resist arrest or prevent the lawful apprehension/detention of themselves or another for any offence.

It can apply to situations involving police officers, but can also apply in other circumstances, e.g. if the case involves a store detective or Police Community Support Officer.

In the Crown Court, the maximum sentence is two years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. In the Magistrates’ Court, it is six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine not exceeding £5,000.

There is no time limit for bringing a prosecution for an either way or indictable only offence. This means that an individual can report a crime at any time, but for less serious offences that happened more than six months ago the police may decide not to take any further action.

There is no time limit for bringing a prosecution for an either way or indictable only offence. This means that you can report a crime at any time, but for less serious offences that happened more than 6 months ago, the police may decide not to take any further action.

The six-month time limit does not apply to other types of assault such as assault occasioning actual bodily harm (which is an either way offence, meaning it can be heard in magistrates’ court or in the Crown Court), or grievous bodily harm (which is an indictable only offence).

• It is advisable that if you have been the victim of an assault to report it as soon as possible though. 

Parliament sets the maximum (and sometimes minimum) penalty for any offence. When deciding the appropriate sentence, the court must follow any relevant sentencing guidelines, unless it is not in the interests of justice to do so.

Sentencing for assault depends on the offence type.

Common assault:

• the maximum sentence is six months’ custody
• if the assault is against an emergency worker, the maximum sentence is one year’s custody
• if the assault is racially or religiously aggravated, the maximum sentence is two years’ custody

Actual bodily harm:

• the maximum sentence is five years’ custody
• if the assault is racially or religiously aggravated, the maximum sentence is seven years’ custody

Grievous bodily harm or wounding:

• the maximum sentence is five years’ custody.
• if the assault is racially or religiously aggravated, the maximum sentence is seven years’ custody
• if the assault was committed with intent to cause GBH/wounding then the maximum sentence is life imprisonment.

Aggravating factors increasing the severity of the sentence may include:

• use of a weapon
• targeting a vulnerable victim
• the assault was committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs
• the assault involved an abuse of power or took advantage of a position of trust

Sentences are worked out by assessing harm (an assessment of the damage caused to the victim) and culpability (a measure of how responsible the offender was in the assault).

Factors increasing the severity of the sentence may include:

• use of a weapon
• targeting a vulnerable victim
• the assault was committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs
• the assault involved an abuse of power or took advantage of a position of trust

Factors decreasing the severity of the sentence may include:

• the assault consisted only of a single blow
• the assault was an isolated incident
• the offender:
  • is of good character
  • has shown remorse
  • has a serious medical condition
  • lacks maturity, or has a mental disorder or learning disability
  • is the sole or primary carer for dependent relatives

Self-defence – or defence of another person – is a defence to a charge of assault, where a person honestly (even if mistakenly) believes in the need to defend themselves or another and uses reasonable force on the facts as they believe them to be.

The basic principles of self-defence are set out in Palmer v R, [1971] AC 814 who says, “A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large.”

In other words, self-defence is available as a legal defence against crimes committed against us where force is being (or even suspected of being) used. So if we are being or about to be attacked by, for example, a hunt follower, we are not commiting an assault if we use reasonable force to defend ourselves.

What is reasonable force though? This is difficult to define clearly in law, but the words of Lord Morris in (Palmer v R 1971 AC 814) are repeated on multiple websites: “If the jury thought that that in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary, that would be the most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken …”

The Crime Prosecution Service says that “A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of:

• self-defence;
• defence of another;
• defence of property;
• prevention of crime;
• [making a] lawful arrest.”

Yes. Even when the police are allowed to use force, they commit an assault if they use more force than is reasonable in the circumstances.

This means that if, for example, a person is legally arrested, but then the police restrain the individual with more force or for longer than they need to, that person could sue the police for assault.

Suing the police is clearly going to be complicated and Citizens Advice says “You should get advice from a solicitor. Your legal costs might be more than the amount of damages you would get. You might be eligible for legal aid, but you may have to pay a contribution towards the expenses of the case.”

Note that personal injury claims must be made within three years of the assault taking place.

It apparently is, yes.

We absolutely do not condone any form of assault, even dairy-based ones, and assault should be treated seriously, but it does seem that Essex Police were out to make an example of  ‘Milkshake Girl’ Victoria Thomas Bowen when they charged her with ‘assault by beating’ and criminal damage for throwing the banana-flavoured contents of a takeaway cup at Trump-supporter and Reform leader Nigel Farage in May 2024.

Why police were so quick to charge her while many forces routinely ignore attacks on monitors and sabs by hunts is a question left hanging in the air…

Ms Bowen is is due to appear at Colchester Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, 2 July.