A man is dining at a restaurant when a political activist, who vehemently disagrees with the man's publicly known political views, approaches his table. The activist, intending to cause offense, spits on the man's food just as the man is about to take a bite. The man is not physically injured but is disgusted and offended. What crime has the activist most likely committed?
Assault
No crime, because the man was not physically injured.
Battery is the unlawful application of force to another person, resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching. In this scenario, the activist intentionally caused an offensive contact. The contact does not need to be with the victim's body itself but can be with something closely connected to them, such as the food they are about to eat. Physical harm is not a required element for battery; an offensive touching is sufficient. Assault is either an attempt to commit a battery or the intentional creation of a reasonable apprehension of imminent bodily harm. While the man may have apprehended the act, the spitting itself completed the crime of battery, making it the most accurate charge. Therefore, choosing 'no crime' is incorrect because the elements of battery have been met.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the legal definition of battery?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does battery differ from assault in legal terms?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Can you provide examples of actions that would be considered battery?