IRAC answer to the question I was received about whether sam is criminally liable for assault for his actions against basil. Is this a good answer so far or is there anything I could change/doesnt make sense? thanks!

The legal issue Is if Sam is criminally liable for assault in respect to his actions against Basil? The defendant, Sam Maxwell has been accused of 'shaking his fist' towards Basil, along with threatening Basil by shouting 'if you tell anyone about this, I'll find you.'

The Open University (2023) 'Unit 13: Non fatal offences against the person' gives the common law definition of assault. In this instance, assault is defined as the 'Defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence'. To be criminally liable for assault, Sam must have the mens rea of the offence which is to act with intent or recklessness. In R V Lamb [1967] it is stated that the victim does not have to be put in fear but has to be aware that there is a reasonable chance that 'they are about to be subjected to violence'.

When Sam Maxwell intentionally waved his fists in the face of Basil, it would be perceived by the ordinary person as intimidating. Any purposeful conduct by a person to put another person in reasonable fear of suffering harm in the immediate future is considered assault.

Based on the facts of this case, Sam Maxwell does reach the legal definition of assault.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The IRAC Issue Rule Analysis Conclusion answer provided is a good start and covers the key aspects o... View the full answer