Assault Performance Task
Physical assault is becoming a common habit in society. In a single day, the number of cases registered and heard in the court is subjugated by the physical attack. The rising instances of physical assault are partly due to social factors such as racial/tribal diversity, gender, and economic diversities. A detailed elucidation of the increasing assault cases requires an understanding of anthropological elements. Despite the piling cases on physical assault, the most significant challenge dwells on deciding the court cases. Therefore, physical assault cases put both the attorneys and the judges into a legal and justice test. As Martin Luther King Junior asserted, “justice denied somewhere is injustice allowed everywhere.” The attorneys’ argument and the application of the legal provisions by the judges determine the level of justice granted. However, the understanding and interpretation of assault laws are essential. Therefore in this assault case scenario, the attorney has a critical role in guiding the legal team towards the decision of the case.
As an attorney in Georgia, the elucidation of Georgia assault and Battery laws is crucial in providing appropriate legal advice to the court. Georgia Assault and Battery laws offer specific definitions of assault felonies and the specific penalty for each. First and foremost, the assault felonies are classified into assault and battery. Assault felonies are defined as any form of abuse intended to harm or threaten the victim but do not involve physical contact between the victim and the perpetrators. On the other hand, a battery offense is a felony that the perpetrator threatens and or harms the life of the victim (Currul-Dykan, 2014). Further distinctions are provided based on the magnitude of each offense.
Assault felony is categorized into a simple and aggravated assault. An assault can be considered as a simple assault if the perpetrator attempts to commit a ferocious injury to someone. Moreover, putting someone into a condition that can be considered to cause harm of any kind can qualify to be a simple assault. Simple assaults do not require physical touch between the victims and the perpetrators. In this regard can be used to prove a simple assault in court.
On the other hand, an offense qualifies an aggravated assault if the perpetrator assaults the victim intending to rate, murder, or rob. Besides, anyone who threatens the lives of the victim, even without touch, qualifies to have committed an aggravated assault. Shooting from a motor vehicle towards someone or a group of people can be considered an aggravated assault (Curril-Dykan, 2014).
Similarly, a felony can be categorized into a battery based on the mode of physical contact. For instance, a simple battery is a felony that is committed by making physical contact that can provoke or insult the victim. Nevertheless, the crime includes intended physical harm to the victim. It is worth noting that simple battery cases are common among many courts. Simple battery cases rely on the physical evidence that conforms to the perpetrator’s intention. Aggravated battery is another category in battery felonies (Feissner, 2014). Apart from involving contact, aggravated assault is characterized by a malicious and intentional attack on the victim. In this regard, the victim may suffer the loss and disfigure of one or many parts of his body.
Despite the above definitions, detailed distinctions among them enhance more accuracy appending penalties to the accused persons. For instance, the term “serious disfigurement” implies a physical alteration to one’s body. In this regard, it may include a broken bone that seems to alter physical appearance. Other features may include scares that may portray on one’s face or any part of the body.
The decision on the case scenario provided will focus on the Georgia Criminal Code. The charges against the accused will consider various factors that surrounded the crimes. First and foremost is Samuel Clark. Being at the center of the felony, he falls victim to the death of Bubba Hurt. In unveiling how the events connected, it worth noting that Bubba Hurt initiated the attack by shoving Clark, leading to his fall. A subsequent kick from Skeeter Redrum was a clear indication that Samuel Clark was in danger and needed action to rescue him. While swinging the umbrella, he would intend to safeguard his life. Bubba happened to be the victim of random hitting.
Moreover, the attack by two persons against one overwhelmed Samuel Clark and his force to swing the umbrella can interpret it to be a counter that would save his life. Besides, Redrum had pinned him down when he turned to the umbrella. The desperation for safety in this event justified the need for self-defense. Therefore, this should be considered based on the Georgia Criminal Code Title 16, chapter 3, article 2 (Crucilla, 2014). In this scenario, Samuel Clark should not be charged for the death that resulted from his self-defense. Moreover, no evidence suggests that he had the intent to kill Butta Hurt, but all evidence depicts that he was in danger and overwhelmed.
However, Skeet Redrum, in conjunction with Butta Hurt, provoked Samuel Clark by yelling at him. They later extend it by executing a physical assault against Samuel Clark. Skeet Redrum kicked Samuel Clark, destabilizing Samuel Clark’s mobility. While Samuel Clark was struggling to wake up after the shove from Butta Hurt, Skeet kicked him, revealing the fact that Skeet Redrum intended to cause harm to Samuel. Although Samuel fell upon being kicked, he did not lose any part of his body, and Butta Hurt did not disfigure in any way. According to Georgia Criminal Laws, the court should charge Skeet Redrum for committing a simple battery felony (Crucilla, 2014).
Summer Breeze, who seems not to feature at the initial stage of the fight, according to the witnesses, joins that fight against Samuel Clark. She hits Samuel Clark on the head, making him lose his conscious. As a result, Samuel Clark develops a permanent brain injury. Summer Breeze’s intention of harm and murder are revealed in her decision to heat his head. With the awareness of the delicate nature of the brain, Summer Breeze uses any available weapon to execute the harm to Samuel Clark. Since her offense involved resulted in permanent brain injury, Summer Breeze should be charged for committing aggravated battery. Although Butta hurt had succumbed to the damages resulting from Samuel Clark’s defense act, he would have been charged for committing simple battery. He was the first to provoke Samuel Clark.
In a nutshell, the case scenario portrays a perfect example of assault cases. Among the victims involved, the court should not charge Samuel Clark, based on the fact that his reaction to the death of Butta Hurt was self-defense. On the other hand, Skeet Redrum and Summer Breeze should be charged for their intention and execution to harm Samuel Clark.
Reference
Crucilla, B. C. (2014). Criminal Law. Mercer L. Rev., 66, 37.
Currul‐Dykeman, K. (2014). Assault and Battery. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 1-3.
Fleissner, J. P. (1996). Criminal Law and Procedure: A Two-Year Survey. Mercer L. Rev., 48, 219.