Assault, Battery, And Crimes Against Persons

Assault, Battery, and Crimes against Persons
Name
Institution
Assault, Battery, and Crimes against Persons
Some similarities and differences exist between the crimes of assault with a deadly weapon and the crime of felonious and aggravated battery. In terms of their definitions, assault with a deadly weapon refers to an aggravated assault that involves an attempt to use a dangerous weapon to cause to a person serious bodily injury. This type of crime usually causes fear within the other person about imminent injury from a deadly weapon. Felonious aggravated battery, on the other hand, involves the actual using of a dangerous weapon to cause severe bodily injury, and this is usually directed towards a vulnerable person. Even the mere intent of a person to cause this kind of harm is still termed as an aggravated battery (McBain 2015). This crime differs from aggravated assault in that it often involves the breaking or causing a disfigurement to a person. The crime of aggravated assault can happen when there is fear of bodily harm on the victim’s side, depending on the conduct of the perpetrator. The other difference is that while in an aggravated assault a person has reason to believe that they will get hurt with the weapon, felonious aggravated battery involves the actual use of the weapon in causing harm. An example of an assault with a deadly weapon crime is a case whereby a perpetrator points a sword at a person, thereby instilling fear in the latter that they may be stubbed or cut. An example of felonious and aggravated battery is one involving a person striking another very hard with the butt of a gun to the extent that they bleed.
Given the circumstances of the first scenario presented, the jurisdiction in which the crime occurred should consider the actions of the man as assault with a deadly weapon. According to the State of New York, a person is declared guilty of first-degree assault if they “swing a knife at another with intent to cause serious physical injury and if… they are successful,” (Garner & Anderson 2011). In the given case, the attacker tried to frighten (A) with the knife and successfully managed to harm her with it in an attempt to steal from her. The fact that a dangerous knife was used to cause harm also justifies this as an aggravated assault since such a knife is generally considered a deadly weapon. Therefore, for all these reasons the jurisdiction is justified to treat this case as an assault of an aggravated nature. Similarly, the man’s actions can still be punished as a battery because his conduct resulted in actual bodily injury. Besides, the man intentionally stroke (A) with his knife in an angry manner while fully aware that he would harm her. These factors justify battery charges against him. The one fact pattern that would change the charge to simple assault is the assertion of self-defense by the man. According to Garner and Anderson (2011), there are only special circumstances under which self-defense can be used, and the amount of force is also considered. In the presented case, the woman (A) is noted to be trained in self-defense, and since she used her knee and fists against the attacker, the latter could point out that he was acting out of self-de...