Is there a big difference between assault and battery?

Is there a big difference between assault and battery?

So, what is an assault? And how is it different, or is it different, than a battery? Technically speaking, there is a difference.

Most of the states (all except Louisiana, to my knowledge) have adopted a “common law” approach to their criminal justice system. Without boring you with too many details, this simply means that many of our basic criminal laws are not formal laws (i.e., published statutes) at all. State legislators did not debate what the meaning of the criminal offenses should be, then vote for the suggested definitions, and then send the bills to the state governors for their signatures. They are merely legal definitions handed down from long ago rulings by English courts from when our country was a collection of British colonies.

For instance, in Virginia, you can find no statutes that declare what legally defines larceny, robbery, arson, or even murder, for that matter. We get these definitions from the English courts of yesteryear. As citizens, we are expected to be aware of these laws and their definitions. There is a popular saying in criminal defense law, “ignorance of the law is no defense.” This is true for those laws which have been enacted by our state governments along with those that are based in common law. Most folks, however, can give good examples of the common law crimes; but few, if any, can provide the legal definitions unless of course they’ve been to law school.

So, what is an assault? And how is it distinct, or is it different, than a battery? Technically speaking, there’s a difference. In reality, many states have equivocated the terms by statute to necessarily mean the very same thing. A battery is defined as the intentional harmful or offensive touching of another. An assault may be defined as both an attempted battery, or the intentional placing of another in fear of harm.

By example, one commits a battery by picking up a baseball bat and intentionally striking another (provided, of course, the victim is not a willing party). However, if that same person is swinging at a baseball and he inadvertently strikes someone else, that is not a battery simply because there was no intent to strike the other individual. One commits an assault by one of two ways. They may intentionally swing the bat at another and miss, which would be an attempted battery; or they might merely hold the bat in a threatening manner towards the other individual placing that individual in fear of being hit.

Another legal concept that is often used against those charged with assault and battery is that of “transferred intent”. Simply stated if one intends to strike one person and inadvertently strikes another, that person’s intent can be transferred to the individual struck. In that situation, one can be charged with assault on the one (attempted battery) and battery on the other.

You cannot be charged with an assault and battery for the same act on the same person. Once the assault (attempted battery) becomes a battery, the assaultive act is merged with the battery offense.

Although both assault and battery are misdemeanor criminal offenses and usually labeled “simple”, you should contact a criminal attorney for assault and battery if you have been charged with either offense. They will be able to chat with you any feasible defenses to the charge, for example your objective during the act.

James Garrett is the founding member of the Virginia Beach law firm of Garrett Law Group, PLC. He practices daily in the courts of Virginia Beach and Norfolk. His firm represents people for criminal and traffic defense, divorce and child custody, and personal injury recovery. If you have any questions regarding these issues, please call for a free consultation at (757) 422-4646, or email at garrettlawgroup@yahoo.com

Related Difference Assault And Battery Articles

Is there a big difference between assault and battery?

Bizarre email exchange between state senator and displeased constituent

Missouri state Sen. Brian Nieves (photo: Wikipedia)

When an unsolicited email arrives, most people hit delete and move on with their lives. Not Bart Cohn.

The Wildwood, Mo., resident received a newsletter from Brian Nieves, a Republican member of the Missouri Senate with whom Cohn does not see eye to eye on the issues. According to River Front Times, which originally reported the story, Cohn wrote a seven-word reply to Nieves' newsletter. "Take me off your mailing list. Freak."

And thus began a wackadoo exchange of insults between Cohn and Nieves, all of which were forwarded by Cohn to River Front Times.

After Cohn's tersely worded response, Nieves issued a retort:

Who are you? Is there something wrong with you? Are you incapable of communicating in a way that common, decent people do?

Tell me this, how did you ever even get on MY Distribution list?

Cohn fired back:

Remove me from your list. I despise you.

Nieves then wrote this:

Tell me who you are and how you ever got on my list. I don't take we'll to some troll sneaking on to my distribution list.

Things get weird(er). From Cohn:

I don't care what you take well to. Take me off your list. I don't know how I got on your list. And I don't sneak. I'll tell you to your face I think you're a freak. Now act like a big boy, senator, and remove me from your list as I've requested. And stop harassing me or I'll make an issue of it.

Nieves apparently took issue with the word "issue." He wrote:

Explain "issue"

Are you threatening an elected official? I'm sure your very Big & Bad & Tuff.

The ONE and ONLY way for you to have gotten on my list is by YOU having communicated with me via email. I guess your the type who wants to be able to throw something my way but not hear back?

You'll be removed but be Very Careful to NEVER Threaten me! Also, don't ever send anything to this email address again because every time you do, you automatically get put back on the distribution list. :-)

Think that's the end? Nope. Cohn responded with more insults:

I didn't threaten anyone, you tool. You are such a douchetard it's not even funny. Now go do some work on your insane conspiracy theories that everyone laughs about behind your back. You're a joke!

To which Nieves wrote:

Wow. Your communications are so thought provoking, well written, and intelligent. Perhaps you secretly want to be on my distribution list because every time you send me a message, your email is recaptured and put on my distribution list. I'm tiring of taking you off every time you email me AGAIN so unless you are in love with me or have some other sort of sick obsession with me (sorry, I'm straight as an arrow) you should probably stop emailing me so that you don't keep getting put back on the list. Should I type these instructions slower? Are you having a hard time understanding? BTW - I archive ALL questionable emails like yours in case there's ever any doubt about who got ugly first. Go back to the grade school playground where people you can successfully bully and out smart are playing cuz junior... You are way out of your league with me.

Cohn apparently did not respond. But Nieves couldn't resist writing one more email and referencing a photo of Cohn from Facebook.

BTW... You really don't look good with a beard.

In a comment posted on the River Front Times story, a person identified as Cohn expressed some regret for his part in the exchange.

I shouldn't have called him names. But I'd just had enough of him. He was spamming me left and right with his insane newsletters, I'd just had surgery, and I couldn't take it anymore. I was shocked he wrote me back immediately, I had expected him just to remove me from his distribution list. And then for him to write me back 5 more times after that... I'll let the public be the judge of what went down between us.

Messages seeking comment from Nieves were not immediately returned.

View the original article here