Topic revision

Non-Fatal Offences
and Defences

This page covers the violence offences and defences that the sergeants exam draws from Blackstone's chapters 1.10 and 1.4: common assault and battery, ABH, wounding and GBH, threats to kill, assaults on emergency workers, consent, strangulation and suffocation, self-defence and the prevention of crime, mistake, intoxication and duress. It sets out the section numbers and maxima as in force on 4 October 2026, the traps that write the wrong answers, and six worked questions.

Independent information, not advice · Sources checked 4 October 2026 · England and Wales unless stated

Short answer: what do you need to know?

Know the harm ladder and the state of mind at each rung: common assault and battery (s.39 CJA 1988, six months), ABH (s.47, five years), wounding or GBH without intent (s.20, five years) and with intent (s.18, life, indictable only). Know that strangulation is s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015 and that consent is no defence to ABH or worse. Know the s.76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 test for reasonable force, including the householder rule, the s.76(5) bar on drunken mistakes and the s.76(6A) retreat factor.

Contents

At a Glance Assault and Battery ABH, Wounding and GBH Threats to Kill Emergency Workers Consent Strangulation Self-Defence and Force Mistake, Intoxication, Duress Traps Worked Questions Chapter Map Scenarios Checklist Not Verified FAQs Sources

Non-fatal offences and defences at a glance

This is a topic page in our sergeants exam series. For the exam itself see the sergeant exam explained and for how to plan your revision see the sergeant exam revision plan. The human rights side of force, such as Article 2 and lethal force, is covered on the use of force and human rights page, so we do not repeat it here. The exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting, so treat this page as a revision aid beside the Manuals, not a replacement for them.

The offences, the mental element and the maximum (law as in force, checked 4 October 2026)
Offence	What it is	Mode of trial and maximum
Common assault, s.39 CJA 1988	Intentionally or recklessly causing another to apprehend immediate unlawful violence	Summary only. Maximum 6 months or a fine (CPS guidance; s.39)
Battery, s.39 CJA 1988	Intentional or reckless application of unlawful force; usually charged as assault by beating	Summary only. Maximum 6 months or a fine
Assault on constable, s.89(1) Police Act 1996	Assault on a constable, or a person assisting, in the execution of duty	Summary. 6 months or a fine up to level 5. s.89(2) resist or obstruct: 1 month or level 3
Emergency worker, s.1 2018 Act	Common assault or battery on an emergency worker acting in the exercise of their functions	Either way. Up to 2 years on indictment
ABH, s.47 OAPA 1861	Assault or battery occasioning actual bodily harm	Either way. Maximum 5 years (see the maximum penalties trap)
Wounding or inflicting GBH, s.20	Unlawfully and maliciously wounding or inflicting GBH; foresight that some harm might result	Either way. Maximum 5 years (see the maximum penalties trap)
Wounding or GBH with intent, s.18	Wounding or causing GBH with intent to do GBH, or intent to resist or prevent lawful apprehension	Indictable only. Maximum life
Threats to kill, s.16	Without lawful excuse, a threat to kill intending the recipient to fear it would be carried out	Either way. Maximum 10 years
Strangulation or suffocation, s.75A SCA 2015	Intentionally strangling, or any other act affecting breathing that is a battery	Either way. Maximum 5 years on indictment; in force 7 June 2022
Assault to resist arrest, s.38 OAPA 1861	Assault with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of any person	Either way. Maximum 2 years (s.38)

How much of the paper is this topic?

In the College's March 2026 sergeants' subject area breakdown we counted six scored rows under Non-fatal offences against the person (assault offences twice, consent, other assault offences, strangulation or suffocation, and threats to kill) and two under General defences (duress, and inadvertence and mistake), out of 140 scored questions. That is a count of that one sitting only. The College says the breakdown is valid only for March 2026 and must not be used to predict future papers, so do not read it as a weighting. Note too that no row in that sitting was labelled self-defence or use of force, which tells you nothing about the next paper.

Common assault and battery

Section 39(1) Criminal Justice Act 1988 makes common assault and battery summary offences, liable to a fine up to level 5, imprisonment for up to six months, or both. Section 39(2) makes that subject to s.1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, covered below. The statute does not define the two offences. The CPS charging guidance gives the working definitions:

Common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence.
Battery is the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force to another person. Where battery is charged, the CPS says it should be put as assault by beating.

The exam angle is that the two are separate. No injury is needed for either. Words and even silence can form an assault if they cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force, and the verified practice question on silent telephone calls rests on R v Ireland.

Time limits and related offences
Point	Rule	Source
Usual time limit	Proceedings for a summary only offence must start within six months of the offence	s.127 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, as stated in the CPS guidance
Domestic abuse battery or common assault	Where the behaviour amounts to domestic abuse, proceedings may be commenced at any time that is both within two years of the offence and within six months of the first date on which the complainant gave a witness statement to the police or was video interviewed by them	s.39A CJA 1988
Assault on a constable	Assaults a constable in the execution of duty, or a person assisting: six months or a fine up to level 5, or both	s.89(1) Police Act 1996
Resist or obstruct a constable	One month or a fine up to level 3, or both	s.89(2) Police Act 1996
Assault to resist arrest	Assault with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of himself or anyone else for any offence; two years	s.38 OAPA 1861
Reasonable force by a constable under PACE	Where PACE confers a power and does not make it depend on consent, the officer may use reasonable force, if necessary	s.117 PACE 1984

Note that s.89 asks whether the officer was acting in the execution of their duty. The CPS guidance observes that the duties of a police officer are not defined in statute, and suggests adding common assault or battery as an alternative charge where that is in doubt, because the conduct is an assault anyway.

ABH, wounding and grievous bodily harm

The three harm offences in the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 are best learned as a ladder. Each rung adds a kind of harm, and ss.18 and 20 differ from each other only in the mental element.

The harm ladder
Offence	Conduct and result	State of mind	Points to remember
Common assault	Fear of immediate unlawful force	Intent or recklessness	No injury needed. Silent calls can be enough on the right facts (R v Ireland)
Battery	Unlawful force applied	Intent or recklessness	Touching can be enough; no injury needed
ABH, s.47	Assault or battery causing actual bodily harm	Intent or recklessness as to the assault; none as to the harm	More than transient and trifling; recognised psychiatric illness can count with medical evidence
Wounding or GBH, s.20	Wound, or inflict GBH, with or without a weapon	Intend or foresee that some harm might result (Savage; Parmenter)	Wound means a break in the continuity of the skin. GBH means really serious harm
Wounding or GBH, s.18	Wound, or cause GBH	Intent to do GBH, or intent to resist or prevent lawful apprehension	Intent is the whole difference from s.20. Life maximum

Section 47: assault occasioning actual bodily harm

Section 47 covers assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The CPS guidance describes it as an intentional or reckless assault causing ABH. The harm need not be permanent but must be more than transient and trifling (it cites R v Donovan). R v Brown confirmed that consent may be a defence to battery but not to ABH or GBH. The CPS also says that psychological injury short of a recognisable psychiatric illness is not bodily harm, and that psychiatric injury should be supported by medical evidence (R v D, R v Chan-Fook). Our verified bank question on ABH takes the same line: an injury that interferes with health or comfort, with no need for a weapon or hospital treatment.

Sections 20 and 18: wounding and GBH

GBH means really serious harm, which need not be permanent or dangerous (the CPS cites R v Golding). A wound needs a break in the continuity of the skin. Section 20 is unlawfully and maliciously wounding, or inflicting GBH, with or without a weapon. In s.20 the defendant must intend or foresee that the act might cause some harm, per R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter. Because an attempt needs intent as to the consequence, the CPS notes you cannot attempt s.20: the intended version is s.18.

Section 18 requires wounding or causing GBH with intent to do GBH, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person. It is indictable only. The CPS adds that the second limb can be used where the injury is GBH but the intent to resist or prevent apprehension is clearer than the intent to do GBH. The statute includes a wounding offence of either kind; the exam will usually tell you what the defendant meant.

The 7 year trap

The 1861 Act text on legislation.gov.uk that applies to Northern Ireland sets a seven year maximum for ss.20 and 47. The England and Wales text no longer states a number. The five year maximum for each follows from the enacted three years of penal servitude, raised to up to five by s.1(1) Penal Servitude Act 1891, and converted to imprisonment by s.1(1) Criminal Justice Act 1948; the CPS guidance also states five years. A question set for a sergeants exam in England and Wales takes the England and Wales figure.

Threats to kill: s.16

Section 16 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is committed by a person who, without lawful excuse, makes to another a threat, intending that that other would fear it would be carried out, to kill that other or a third person. The maximum on indictment is ten years, and the CPS says the offence is triable either way.

Intent is aimed at fear. The defendant must intend the person receiving the threat to fear it would be carried out. They need not intend to carry it out.
The victim's reaction is evidence, not an element. The CPS guidance says the effect on the recipient may support the case on intention, but intention is what must be proved.
A third person can be the target. The threat can be to kill someone other than the person who hears it, but the fear intended must be that of the person to whom the threat was made.
Words are enough. The statute speaks of a threat and, unlike assault, does not mention immediacy.
Lawful excuse. The statute says without lawful excuse. We have not verified the Manuals' treatment of what counts.

The CPS lists factors for assessing intent, including the history between the parties, the suspect's antecedent history, a weapon, the suspect's demeanour, the effect on the recipient and any admissions.

Assaults on emergency workers

Section 1 Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 applies to an offence of common assault or battery committed against an emergency worker acting in the exercise of functions as such a worker. Section 1(2) gives up to the general limit in a magistrates' court on summary conviction, and up to two years on indictment. The two year figure came from the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, in force from 28 June 2022 per the revised text; the original maximum was 12 months. Section 1(3) extends the offence to circumstances where the victim is not at work but is doing something that would have been in the exercise of their functions if done in work time.

Who is an emergency worker (s.3(1) of the 2018 Act)
Group	How the Act describes them
Police	A constable; a person other than a constable who has the powers of a constable or is otherwise employed for police purposes or engaged to provide services for police purposes
National Crime Agency	A National Crime Agency officer
Prisons and custody	A prison officer; a person employed or engaged to carry out similar functions in a custodial institution; a prisoner custody officer or custody officer, so far as relating to escort functions
Fire and rescue	A person employed or engaged to provide fire services or fire and rescue services; a person employed or engaged to provide search services or rescue services (or both)
NHS	A person employed or engaged to provide NHS health services, or services supporting them, whose general activities in doing so involve face to face interaction with individuals receiving the services or with other members of the public
Paid or unpaid	It is immaterial whether the employment or engagement is paid or unpaid (s.3(2))

The practice question in the worked section turns on the PCSO: s.3(1)(b) covers someone other than a constable who is employed for police purposes. The CPS guidance adds that, apart from the offence itself, s.68A Sentencing Act 2020 requires a court sentencing an assault on a person providing a public service or performing a public duty to treat that as an aggravating factor and say so in open court.

Consent

The rule the exam keeps testing is that consent is a defence to battery but not, in general, to the infliction of ABH or worse. The CPS guidance states the principle from R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212 as: consent may be a defence to battery but not to the infliction of any more serious harm, absent good reason for a recognised exception. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 has since put part of that into statute.

Consent across the offences on this page
Offence	Is consent a defence?	Authority
Common assault and battery	Consent can be a defence	R v Brown as the CPS states it; the exceptions are in Blackstone's chapter 1.10
ABH, wounding, GBH (ss.47, 20, 18)	Consent is not a defence unless a recognised exception applies	R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212; CPS guidance
Harm for sexual gratification	Consent is not a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47	s.71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021. Narrow STI exception in s.71(4) for ss.20 and 47 only
Strangulation or suffocation, s.75A	Statutory defence if the defendant shows consent, but lost if serious harm results and the defendant intended or was reckless as to serious harm	s.75A(2) to (4) Serious Crime Act 2015

Section 71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021

Section 71 provides that it is not a defence that the victim consented to the infliction of serious harm for the purposes of obtaining sexual gratification. It applies to offences under ss.18, 20 and 47. Serious harm means GBH, wounding or ABH. It does not matter whether the harm was inflicted for the gratification of D, V or someone else (s.71(5)). Subsection (4) disapplies the rule for ss.20 and 47 where the harm consists of or results from infection with a sexually transmitted infection during sexual activity and V consented to the activity knowing or believing that D had the infection. Subsection (6) says other rules about when consent may or may not be a defence are untouched.

Which defence is it?

If a question mentions harm and sexual gratification and an offence under the 1861 Act, think s.71. If it mentions strangulation or breath-affecting acts, think s.75A(2) to (4), which has its own statutory consent defence with its own serious harm limit. The two are different rules.

Strangulation and suffocation: s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015

Section 70(1) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 inserted s.75A into the Serious Crime Act 2015. It came into force on 7 June 2022 (SI 2022/553). The offence is for England and Wales, applies to everyone, not only to domestic abuse cases, and the CPS says it is not retrospective. Section 75B extends it to acts abroad by a UK national or someone habitually resident in England and Wales.

Strangulation and suffocation: what the statute and CPS guidance say
Element	Rule	Source
Strangulation	A intentionally strangles B	s.75A(1)(a)
Suffocation	A does any other act to B that affects B's ability to breathe and constitutes battery of B	s.75A(1)(b)
Mental element, strangulation	An intentional act. No intent to injure is required and the CPS says it cannot be committed recklessly	CPS guidance
Mental element, suffocation	Needs a battery, so it can be committed intentionally or recklessly	CPS guidance
Injury or breathing impaired	The CPS says none need be proved for strangulation	CPS guidance
Meaning	No statutory definition. Ordinary meaning: pressure or compression around the neck for strangulation; depriving someone of air affecting normal breathing for suffocation	CPS guidance
Consent defence	A defence if B consented, which A must show, but lost where B suffers serious harm and A intended or was reckless as to serious harm	s.75A(2), (3)
How the defence is shown	Taken as shown if sufficient evidence is adduced to raise the issue and the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt	s.75A(4)
Serious harm	GBH or wounding within s.18 OAPA 1861, or ABH within s.47	s.75A(6)
Penalty	Summary: the general limit in a magistrates' court or a fine. Indictment: up to 5 years or a fine	s.75A(5)
Aggravated form	A racially or religiously aggravated form: s.29(1)(ba) Crime and Disorder Act 1998, inserted by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, with up to 7 years on indictment under s.29(2)	s.29 CDA 1998; CPS guidance

ABH, strangulation and suffocation carry the same sentencing powers, but the CPS says that where there is clear and credible evidence of strangulation or suffocation it should be charged rather than ABH, because that is what the offender's record will show. In an exam question about an act that restricts breathing, check whether it is the neck (strangulation) or any other act affecting breathing that is also a battery (suffocation), then check consent and the serious harm exception.

Self-defence, prevention of crime and reasonable force

Section 76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 applies where, on a charge of an offence, the question arises whether the degree of force used by the defendant against another was reasonable in the circumstances and an issue arises whether D is entitled to rely on one of three defences: the common law defence of self-defence, the common law defence of defence of property, or the defences in s.3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (force in the prevention of crime or in making or assisting a lawful arrest). The Criminal Law Act s.3(1) says a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for those purposes. It is not limited to constables.

The s.76 test, subsection by subsection
Point	Rule	Subsection
Which defences	Common law self-defence (including defence of another), common law defence of property, and s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967	s.76(2), (10)(b)
How the circumstances are fixed	By reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be	s.76(3)
Honest mistake	D may rely on a genuinely held belief, even if mistaken and even if unreasonable. Reasonableness goes to whether it was genuinely held	s.76(4)
Drink	No reliance on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication	s.76(5)
Ordinary case	Disproportionate force is not reasonable	s.76(6)
Householder case	Only grossly disproportionate force is automatically unreasonable	s.76(5A), (8A) to (8F)
Retreat	A factor, so far as relevant; not a duty	s.76(6A)
Instinct	A person may not be able to weigh the exact measure of necessary action; an honest and instinctive decision is strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken	s.76(7)
What counts as force	The type and amount of force used	s.76(10)(c)

The householder case

The householder rule is narrower than most candidates assume. Section 76(8A) defines a householder case by four conditions, and a defendant who misses one is in the ordinary case where disproportionate force is not reasonable.

A householder case (s.76(8A) to (8F))
Condition	Detail	Subsection
Defence	Common law self-defence	(8A)(a). Not s.3(1) CLA, so it does not cover force used to prevent crime or make an arrest, such as a shop guard detaining a thief
Place	In or partly in a building or part of a building that is a dwelling or forces accommodation (or both). A building includes a vehicle or vessel	(8A)(b), (8F)
Status	D is not a trespasser when the force is used	(8A)(c)
Belief	D believed V to be in, or entering, the building or part as a trespasser	(8A)(d); belief rules in (4) and (5) apply under (8D)
Workplace link	A workplace internally accessible from the dwelling, and the access between them, is treated as part of the dwelling	(8B); forces accommodation (8C)

In a householder case, force that is grossly disproportionate is not to be regarded as reasonable, which implies that force that is merely disproportionate may still be reasonable. This page does not cover Article 2 and the human rights rules for lethal force: use the use of force and human rights page and our supervisor's guide to the legal test.

Police officers and the same test

The chapter list has a separate heading for police officers (1.4.7) and for use of force to defend, prevent crime and to arrest (1.4.6). Section 117 PACE separately allows a constable to use reasonable force, if necessary, in exercising a PACE power that does not depend on someone else's consent. Do not mix the two: s.117 is a power to use force when exercising a PACE power, while s.76 governs how the reasonableness of force is judged on the defences in subsection (2).

Mistake, intoxication and duress

Mistake

For self-defence and the s.3 defences, the rule is statutory. Section 76(3) fixes the circumstances as D believed them to be and s.76(4) lets D rely on a genuinely held belief whether or not it was mistaken, and whether or not the mistake was reasonable. Reasonableness is relevant only to whether the belief was genuinely held. Our verified practice bank cites R v Williams (Gladstone) for the underlying principle.

Intoxication

Two separate rules sit here and candidates blur them. The first is s.76(5): a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication cannot be relied on for the reasonable force test. The second is the Majewski rule, as stated in our verified bank question: evidence of voluntary intoxication can be considered on whether the defendant formed the specific intent needed for s.18, but it is no defence to s.20, which is a basic intent offence where recklessness is enough. A defendant too drunk to form the s.18 intent may still be convicted of s.20, and an intent formed while drunk is still an intent. We have verified the statutory part from legislation.gov.uk; the Majewski point is taken from our bank only and we have not opened the case itself.

Duress

Our verified bank records that duress by threats is not available to murder, as principal or secondary party (R v Howe), or to attempted murder (R v Gotts); that it can be raised to s.18 in principle; and that under R v Hasan it is unavailable to a person who voluntarily associated with others he foresaw, or ought reasonably to have foreseen, might compel him by threats of violence, without needing to foresee the particular crime. The chapter list also has 1.4.4 on duress of circumstances, which we have not covered. Read the duress headings in chapter 1.4 for the full tests.

The traps that write wrong answers

These are the confusions we expect to see in distractors, based on the law as verified above. They are our reading of where options go wrong, not a description of any real paper.

Traps in this topic
Trap	The wrong thought	The right answer
Assault versus battery	Treating a push as an assault only, or a threat as a battery	Fear of force is assault; applied force is battery. Both are common assault in s.39 terms
ABH needs intent to harm	Choosing the option that demands intent to cause serious harm	Only the assault needs intent or recklessness. The harm need not be intended or foreseen
s.20 wording	Thinking s.20 needs intent to cause GBH	That is s.18. For s.20, foresight that some harm might result is enough per the CPS guidance
Wound means any cut	Calling a bruise or internal bleeding a wound	A wound is a break in the continuity of the skin (CPS guidance)
Maximum penalties	Mixing 5, 7 and 10 years	s.47 and s.20: 5 years (see the 7 year trap callout for how this is derived). s.16: 10. s.18: life. s.75A: 5. Emergency worker battery: 2. s.39: 6 months. The 7 year figure in the 1861 Act text is the Northern Ireland version
Strangulation section number	Quoting s.70 DA Act as the offence	Offence is s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015, inserted by s.70 DA Act 2021
Strangulation needs injury or intent to harm	Looking for a consequence	The CPS guidance says no injury and no impeded breathing need be proved; strangulation is an intentional act and cannot be committed recklessly
Suffocation mens rea	Assuming it matches strangulation	Suffocation is any act affecting breathing that is a battery, so it can be intentional or reckless
PCSO or staff victim	Using s.39 or s.89 because they are not a constable	s.3(1)(b) 2018 Act covers those employed or engaged for police purposes. s.89 is for constables and those assisting
Emergency worker out of role	Ignoring the requirement of acting in the exercise of functions	s.1(1) needs it, though s.1(3) includes off-duty cases where the person is carrying out such functions
Threats to kill	Requiring intent to carry out the threat or that the victim was actually afraid	The intent required is that the recipient would fear it would be carried out. The CPS says the victim's response is evidence, not an element
Retreat	Believing there is a duty to retreat	s.76(6A): a factor, not a duty
Householder rule everywhere	Applying the grossly disproportionate test to a shop, a street or a s.3 arrest	Only the (8A) householder case. Otherwise disproportionate force is not reasonable
Drunk mistake	Letting a drunken mistaken belief support self-defence	s.76(5) bars it
Duress for murder	Offering duress as a defence to murder or attempted murder	R v Howe and R v Gotts, per our verified bank

Six worked questions

These are original practice questions from our toolkit bank, not real, past or leaked exam questions, and they are not endorsed by the College of Policing or Oxford University Press. Each was independently checked against the legislation. Try each before you read the answer, and check the explanation against your Manuals.

Crime Question 1

For an assault to amount to actual bodily harm (ABH) rather than common assault, what must the prosecution additionally prove?

A. That the defendant intended to cause serious harm, or was reckless as to whether serious harm resulted

B. Correct: That the victim suffered an injury that interferes with health or comfort, even if not permanent

C. That a weapon or other dangerous article was used to inflict the injury on the victim

D. That the victim needed treatment at hospital or from a doctor for the injury caused

ABH under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 requires an injury that interferes with health or comfort: bruising, minor cuts, or even a recognised psychiatric injury can qualify. It does not require intent to cause serious harm (that's closer to the threshold for GBH with intent), a weapon, or hospital treatment.

Source: s.47 Offences against the Person Act 1861; R v Miller [1954] 2 QB 282; R v Chan-Fook [1994] 1 WLR 689

Crime Question 2

A PCSO is pushed hard in the chest by a man she is moving on from a shop doorway. She is not injured. Which statement about the offence is correct?

A. Correct: He can be charged under s.1 Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, which is triable either way with a maximum of 2 years' imprisonment on indictment

B. The 2018 Act does not apply, because only a constable or a prison officer counts as a police-related emergency worker, so this is ordinary battery under s.39

C. It is summary only with a maximum of 6 months' imprisonment, like any battery under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988, with her role an aggravating factor

D. It is battery of an emergency worker, triable either way with a maximum of 12 months' imprisonment on indictment, the penalty set when the 2018 Act came into force

Section 3(1)(b) of the 2018 Act covers anyone, other than a constable, who is employed for police purposes, so a PCSO acting in the exercise of her functions is an emergency worker. Section 1 makes common assault or battery of an emergency worker triable either way, with a maximum of 2 years on indictment. The 12-month figure was the original maximum; the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 raised it to 2 years.

Source: Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 ss.1 and 3

Crime Question 3

Section 71 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 provides that a person's consent to serious harm for the purposes of sexual gratification is not a defence. To which offences does it apply?

A. Common assault and battery only, under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988

B. Correct: Offences under ss.18, 20 and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861

C. Murder and manslaughter only, where death results from the sexual activity

D. All offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, including sexual assault

Section 71 applies to 'relevant offences', defined as offences under ss.18, 20 and 47 of the 1861 Act, and 'serious harm' means GBH, wounding or ABH. It puts the principle in R v Brown into statute for harm inflicted for sexual gratification. There is a narrow exception for ss.20 and 47 where the harm is infection with a sexually transmitted infection and the victim consented to the sexual activity knowing or believing the defendant had it. Consent can still be a defence to common assault and battery.

Source: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 s.71; R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212

Crime Question 4

What is the effect of voluntary intoxication on liability for wounding with intent (s.18) and unlawful wounding (s.20) under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861?

A. Correct: Evidence of voluntary intoxication can be considered on whether he actually formed the specific intent for s.18, but it is no defence to s.20, an offence of basic intent

B. Voluntary intoxication is a complete defence to both offences if the defendant was so drunk that he did not know what he was doing when he struck the blow

C. Voluntary intoxication is irrelevant to both offences, because a drunken intent is still an intent, so juries are directed to ignore drink entirely when deciding whether intent was formed

D. Voluntary intoxication can be a defence to s.20 but not to s.18, because s.18 is the more serious offence and the law will not let drink excuse grave violence

Under the rule in DPP v Majewski (1976), voluntary intoxication may be taken into account on whether the defendant formed a specific intent, such as the intent to cause grievous bodily harm under s.18. It is no defence to a basic intent offence such as s.20, where recklessness is enough. A defendant who is too drunk to form the s.18 intent may still be convicted of s.20, and a drunken intent is still an intent if it was formed.

Source: DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443; Offences Against the Person Act 1861 ss.18 and 20

Crime Question 5

After drinking heavily, a man punches a stranger who reaches into his pocket for a phone, saying he was sure the stranger was going for a knife. Sober, he would have realised there was no threat. On a charge of assault, can he rely on his mistaken belief for self-defence?

A. Yes, because self-defence is judged on the facts as he honestly believed them to be, however that belief arose, so long as his force was reasonable on those facts

B. Yes, but only if a reasonable sober person standing where he was might have made the same mistake about what the stranger was reaching for

C. Correct: No: s.76(5) Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 bars reliance on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication

D. No, because any mistaken belief, drunk or sober, prevents self-defence from succeeding; force is judged only on the facts as they actually were

Section 76(4) normally lets a defendant rely on a genuinely held belief about the circumstances, even if mistaken and even if unreasonable. Section 76(5) removes that protection where the mistaken belief is attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication. The first option is the ordinary rule for sober mistakes; it does not apply here.

Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(3) to (5)

Crime Question 6

A newsagent lives in the flat above her shop, which is connected to the shop by an internal staircase. At 2am she hears an intruder in the shop, goes downstairs and strikes him with a heavy torch, believing he is a burglar. She claims self-defence. Which statement is correct?

A. This is not a householder case, because the force was used in the shop, which is commercial premises, and the householder provisions protect only force used in the part of the building where she actually lives

B. This is a householder case, so any force she honestly believed necessary is lawful, whatever its degree, because a householder confronting an intruder at night faces no proportionality limit at all

C. This is a householder case only if the intruder was armed or she feared for her life; otherwise the ordinary rule applies, under which force that is disproportionate is never reasonable

D. Correct: It can be a householder case, as a workplace internally accessible from her dwelling counts as part of it; the question is whether her force was grossly disproportionate on the facts as she believed them

Section 76(8B) treats a place of work that is internally accessible from the dwelling of a person who works there, and the internal access between them, as part of the dwelling for householder purposes. In a householder case, force that is grossly disproportionate is never reasonable under s.76(5A); force that is disproportionate but not grossly so may still be reasonable in all the circumstances. The second option is wrong because the gross disproportion limit still applies.

Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(5A), (8A) and (8B)

More practice (our toolkit)

We make an exam practice toolkit, so this is our own product. It has hundreds of checked questions across all three areas and a timed 150-question sitting: see the exam prep toolkit. For a free timed set first, use the free sergeant exam mini mock. Neither replaces the Manuals, which are the syllabus.

Map to Blackstone's chapters

Chapter numbers below are for the Blackstone's Police Manual 2026 edition, as listed in Appendix A of the 2026 candidate handbook (September 2025). We could not fetch the 2027 handbook, so the 2027 edition numbering has not been verified. Check the contents page of the edition for your sitting before using any number.

Blackstone's 2026 chapters for this topic (Volume 1: Crime)
Chapter	Title	Sub-chapters listed	Note
1.10	Non-fatal Offences Against the Person	1.10.1 Introduction; 1.10.2 Assault; 1.10.3 Battery; 1.10.4 Assault or Battery?; 1.10.5 Consent; 1.10.6 Assault Offences; 1.10.7 Other Assault Offences; 1.10.8 Threats to Kill; 1.10.9 Strangulation or Suffocation	We could not verify which sub-chapter holds ss.18, 20 and 47, the emergency worker offence or the constable offences, so read the whole chapter
1.4	General Defences	1.4.1 Introduction; 1.4.2 Inadvertence and Mistake; 1.4.3 Duress; 1.4.4 Duress of Circumstances; 1.4.5 Use of Lethal Force and Human Rights; 1.4.6 Use of Force to Defend, Prevent Crime and to Arrest; 1.4.7 Police Officers; 1.4.8 Infancy	1.4.5 is the human rights material: see the use of force page
1.1	Mens Rea (State of Mind)	1.1.2 Intent; 1.1.3 Recklessness; 1.1.4 Malice; 1.1.11 Transferred Mens Rea	Underpins every offence on this page, especially s.20 foresight
1.2	Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct)	1.2.6 Causal Link or Chain of Causation; 1.2.7 Intervening Act	Useful for harm that follows an assault
1.9	Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences	Whole chapter	The aggravated versions of assault offences are covered here, and the CPS notes an aggravated form of strangulation

The handbook says all areas of the syllabus apply to both the sergeants' and inspectors' exams, except chapter 1.8 (Weapons), which is for the sergeants' exam only. Chapters 1.10 and 1.4 are therefore common to both. For the neighbouring Crime material see theft, robbery and burglary, public order offences and misuse of drugs and firearms. For the powers behind lawful arrest, see PACE searches and arrest.

Scenarios to practise on

Illustrative examples, not real incidents, to show how the law above is applied. They are not exam questions.

1. The silent caller A man phones a former colleague every night and stays silent. She believes he is outside and about to attack her. Silent calls are capable of being an assault if they cause her to apprehend immediate unlawful force and he intends or is reckless as to that (R v Ireland, as in our verified bank). It is not a battery, because no force was applied. Stalking or harassment offences may also be available but sit outside this page.

2. The punch that breaks no skin A man punches a stranger in a bar, leaving bruising and a swollen eye. This is ABH under s.47 if the bruising amounts to actual bodily harm: more than transient and trifling. It is not a wound, because the skin is not broken, and it is not GBH unless the harm is really serious. He need not have meant or foreseen the bruising, only the assault.

3. The knife in a pub A man slashes another's forearm with a knife and says he only wanted to scare him. The cut is a wound. Whether it is s.18 or s.20 turns on whether he intended GBH (s.18) or only foresaw that some harm might result (s.20). The CPS guidance says where a knife is used to wound, s.20 or s.18 is almost always the appropriate charge. That is a charging point: the exam question will usually give you the mental element.

4. Hands round the neck During an argument a man grips his partner's throat for several seconds. She has no visible injury. Strangulation under s.75A(1)(a) is complete if he intentionally strangled her; no injury and no impeded breathing needs to be proved per the CPS guidance. Consent is not in issue on these facts. Do not choose ABH just because the options mention injury, and note the offence applies whether or not the pair are partners.

5. The nurse and the PCSO A patient spits at a triage nurse, and later shoves a PCSO who is moving him on. Spit that lands on someone is a battery. Both victims fall within s.3(1) of the 2018 Act if acting in the exercise of their functions: the nurse as an NHS health service worker with face to face contact, the PCSO as a person employed for police purposes. Each offence is triable either way with up to two years on indictment. Be careful to use s.89 Police Act 1996 only where the victim is a constable or assisting one.

6. The shop upstairs A newsagent living above her shop hears an intruder at 2am, goes down the internal stairs and hits him with a torch. If she honestly believed he was a trespasser burglar, this can be a householder case because the shop is internally accessible from her dwelling (s.76(8B)). The question is then whether her force was grossly disproportionate in the circumstances as she believed them to be. If the answer is no, the force may still be found reasonable in all the circumstances; if yes, it cannot be.

7. The guard and the shoplifter A store guard tackles a man running from the shop with unpaid goods. The route is s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 (reasonable force to prevent crime or to make or assist a lawful arrest), with s.76 setting how reasonableness is judged. It is not a householder case: (8A)(a) limits that rule to the common law defence of self-defence. Disproportionate force is not reasonable under s.76(6).

Revision checklist

Can you define assault and battery in one sentence each, and say what mens rea both need?
Can you state, from memory, the maximum for ss.39, 89, 47, 20, 18, 16, 75A and the emergency worker offence?
Do you know that s.18 is indictable only and the only one of the three harm offences with a life maximum?
Can you say what a wound is, and what GBH means, in the CPS wording?
Do you know where the strangulation offence actually lives (s.75A SCA 2015) and which of its limbs can be committed recklessly?
Can you set out when consent is a defence: battery yes, ss.47, 20, 18 no, s.71 DA Act, s.75A rules?
Can you list the emergency worker categories and say what PCSOs and NHS staff must show?
Can you walk through s.76 in order: believed circumstances, mistake, drink, proportionality, retreat, instinct?
Can you describe a householder case in four conditions and say which defence it covers?
Do you know which defences duress is not available for?
Have you checked every figure on this page against the Manuals edition for your sitting?

When this is solid, move on to misconduct regulations and standards, or go back to the promotion hub.

What we could not verify

Blackstone's 2027 chapter numbers. The chapter map is the 2026 edition per the 2026 candidate handbook Appendix A (September 2025). We could not fetch the 2027 handbook Appendix A, so check the 2027 contents page before relying on any number. The exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.
Sub-chapter placement of ss.18, 20 and 47, the s.89 offence and the emergency worker offence. We have not seen the text of the Manuals, so this page cites chapter 1.10 only for these offences.
The five year maximum for ss.20 and 47. The current England and Wales text of the 1861 Act does not state it; we derived it from the as-enacted text, the Penal Servitude Act 1891 and the Criminal Justice Act 1948 and it matches the CPS guidance, but a candidate should confirm the figure in the Manuals.
The list of recognised exceptions to consent for ABH and GBH (such as sport, surgery and similar). The CPS wording refers to a recognised exception without listing them. Read chapter 1.10.
The full test for duress and duress of circumstances. We rely on Howe, Gotts and Hasan only as stated in our verified practice bank, and BAILII returned an error when we tried to read Hasan.
Intoxication. Our verified bank cites DPP v Majewski for the specific and basic intent rule, and s.76(5) is verified from legislation.gov.uk. The 2026 chapter list shows no intoxication heading in 1.4, so we do not know which chapter the Manuals use for the general rule.
Case law beyond the cases named by the CPS and our verified bank. We have not added any other authorities.
Whether the 2027 Manuals reflect any change in the law between now and the sitting. The College gives notice of law changes it will examine after the Manuals are published.
Outstanding 2026 Act changes listed on legislation.gov.uk against the 1988 and 2015 Acts. We did not trace each one; none changes the text of the sections we quote.
Weighting for future papers. The six and two row counts are March 2026 only.

Quick answers

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between assault and battery?

In the CPS charging guidance, common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence, and battery is the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force to another person. Both are summary only under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988, with a maximum of six months. Where battery is charged it is usually put as assault by beating. The exam wants you to keep the two apart: fear of force is an assault, actual force is a battery.

What must be proved for assault occasioning actual bodily harm?

An assault or battery, plus actual bodily harm caused by it, contrary to s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The CPS guidance says harm need not be permanent but must be more than transient and trifling, and that a recognised psychiatric illness can count, supported by medical evidence, while psychological upset short of that does not. No intent to cause the harm is needed, only the intent or recklessness that goes with the assault. The maximum is five years and the offence is triable either way.

What is the difference between s.18 and s.20?

Both involve wounding or grievous bodily harm, and the difference is the state of mind. Section 18 needs intent to do grievous bodily harm (or intent to resist or prevent a lawful apprehension), is indictable only and carries life. Section 20 is wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm, where the CPS guidance (citing R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter) says the defendant must intend or foresee that some harm might result, with a maximum of five years. Wounding needs a break in the continuity of the skin.

Is it an offence to strangle someone if they agree to it?

Section 75A(2) Serious Crime Act 2015 gives a defence if the defendant shows the other person consented, but s.75A(3) takes it away if the person suffers serious harm and the defendant intended that harm or was reckless as to it. Serious harm means GBH, wounding or ABH. Section 75A(4) says the defendant is taken to have shown consent if enough evidence is adduced to raise the issue and the prosecution does not disprove it beyond reasonable doubt. Separately, s.71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021 removes consent as a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47 where serious harm is inflicted for sexual gratification.

Is the strangulation offence in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021?

Section 70 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 inserted the offence into the Serious Crime Act 2015 as s.75A, so you should cite it as s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015 (inserted by s.70 DA Act 2021). It has been in force since 7 June 2022, applies to everyone and not only to domestic abuse cases, and is not retrospective. The maximum on indictment is five years. If a question gives you the section number of the Serious Crime Act, use it.

Does a threat to kill have to be a threat to the person who hears it?

No. Section 16 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 covers a threat to kill that other person or a third person. The key element is the intention: the defendant must intend that the person receiving the threat would fear it would be carried out. It does not matter whether the defendant meant to carry it out, and the maximum is ten years. The offence needs the absence of a lawful excuse.

Who counts as an emergency worker under the 2018 Act?

Section 3(1) Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 lists constables; people with the powers of a constable or otherwise employed or engaged for police purposes (which covers PCSOs and police staff); National Crime Agency officers; prison officers and certain custody and escort staff; fire and rescue personnel; search and rescue personnel; and NHS health service workers whose general activities involve face to face interaction with patients or the public. It does not matter whether the person is paid or unpaid. The victim must have been acting in the exercise of their functions, which includes some off-duty situations under s.1(3).

What is the maximum penalty for assaulting an emergency worker?

For common assault or battery against an emergency worker acting in the exercise of their functions, s.1(2) of the 2018 Act gives up to two years on indictment (raised from 12 months by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 for offences from 28 June 2022, per the revised text). On summary conviction the limit is the general limit in a magistrates' court. Plain battery under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 is capped at six months, which is why the emergency worker version is the one to look for in a question about a PCSO, nurse or paramedic.

Does a person have to retreat before using force in self-defence?

No. Section 76(6A) Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 says a possibility that the person could have retreated is to be considered, so far as relevant, as a factor in deciding whether the force was reasonable, rather than as giving rise to a duty to retreat. So it is neither a duty nor irrelevant. A common distractor says that failing to retreat makes the force automatically unlawful.

What is the householder rule?

In a householder case, s.76(5A) says the force is not to be regarded as reasonable if it was grossly disproportionate in the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. In any other case, s.76(6) says force is not reasonable if it was merely disproportionate. A householder case needs the common law defence of self-defence, force used in or partly in a dwelling or forces accommodation, a defendant who is not a trespasser, and a belief that the victim was in or entering as a trespasser. A workplace internally accessible from the dwelling can be treated as part of it under s.76(8B).

Can a drunken mistake support self-defence?

Not under s.76. Section 76(4) lets a defendant rely on a genuinely held belief about the circumstances even if it was mistaken and unreasonable, but s.76(5) says that does not allow reliance on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication. The reasonableness of the belief is still relevant to whether it was genuinely held. Do not mix this up with the Majewski rule on specific and basic intent, which is about the mental element of the offence.

Is duress a defence to wounding with intent?

Our verified practice bank treats duress by threats as available in principle to s.18, and not available to murder (R v Howe) or attempted murder (R v Gotts). It also records R v Hasan: duress is unavailable to a person who voluntarily associated with others he foresaw, or ought reasonably to have foreseen, might compel him by threats of violence. The full tests are in Blackstone's chapter 1.4 (the 2026 list has headings for duress and duress of circumstances), which we have not reproduced here.

Can I use s.3 Criminal Law Act 1967 as a private citizen?

Yes. Section 3(1) says a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large. It is not limited to constables. Section 76 of the 2008 Act applies to the s.3(1) defences as well as to common law self-defence, so the reasonableness of the force is judged on the circumstances as the person believed them to be.

How many questions on this topic came up in the March 2026 sergeants paper?

In the College's March 2026 sergeants' subject area breakdown, we counted six scored rows under Non-fatal offences against the person (assault offences twice, consent, other assault offences, strangulation or suffocation, and threats to kill) and two under General defences (duress, and inadvertence and mistake). That is a count of that one sitting only. The College says the breakdown is not valid for predicting other papers, and the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.

Evidence

Sources and how we checked them

Every factual claim on this page was written from the sources below, read on 4 October 2026. Rules and figures change, so check the source for the date you are reading this. Where we could not confirm something from an official or independent source, the page says so rather than guessing. Spotted something out of date? See our corrections policy.

legislation.gov.uk: Offences Against the Person Act 1861 ss.16, 18, 20, 38 and 47 — opened 4 October 2026: wording of each offence; s.16 maximum ten years; s.18 wound or cause GBH with intent to do GBH or to resist or prevent lawful apprehension; s.38 two years; mode of trial of ss.16, 20, 38 and 47 noted as amended by Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 Sch.1 para.5. The England and Wales text of ss.20 and 47 no longer states the number: it says penal servitude with the term omitted by Criminal Justice Act 1948 s.1(2). The five year maximum follows from the as-enacted text (penal servitude, three years), Penal Servitude Act 1891 s.1(1) (penal servitude up to five years where the enactment allowed less) and Criminal Justice Act 1948 s.1(1) (imprisonment for the former maximum term of penal servitude); this is our reading, and the CPS guidance below states five years. The default page also carries a Northern Ireland only version with seven years (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice Act 1988 ss.39 and 39A — common assault and battery summary offences, six months or fine, subject to the 2018 Act; s.39A two-year limit with a six-month condition for domestic abuse cases (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Serious Crime Act 2015 s.75A (inserted by Domestic Abuse Act 2021 s.70) — the strangulation or suffocation offence as revised: elements, consent defence, serious harm exception, five years on indictment, in force 7 June 2022. legislation.gov.uk also listed an outstanding 2026 Act insertion of s.69(2A) in the same Part, which does not change the text of s.75A (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 ss.70 and 71 — s.70 inserted ss.75A and 75B into the 2015 Act; s.71 consent to serious harm for sexual gratification is not a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47, with the STI exception in s.71(4) (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 ss.1 and 3 — either way offence, two years on indictment from 28 June 2022; the definition of emergency worker in s.3(1); s.1(3) off-duty cases (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76 — the reasonable force test, honest belief, intoxication, householder cases, retreat and the instinctive action considerations; read as up to date to 2 October 2026 (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Law Act 1967 s.3 and Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 s.117 — s.3(1) reasonable force to prevent crime or make or assist a lawful arrest; s.117 PACE reasonable force by a constable where the Act confers a power (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/117) (accessed 4 October 2026)
legislation.gov.uk: Police Act 1996 s.89 and Sentencing Act 2020 s.224 — s.89(1) assault on a constable in the execution of duty, six months; s.89(2) resist or obstruct, one month. Sentencing Act 2020 s.224 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/224) sets the magistrates' court limit at 6 months for summary and 12 months for either way offences as revised (accessed 4 October 2026)
CPS: Offences against the Person, incorporating the Charging Standard (updated 26 February 2026) — definitions of assault, battery, ABH and GBH, mode of trial and maximum penalties, R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter, R v Brown, R v Chan-Fook, Golding and Donovan as cited by the CPS, threats to kill intent point, s.39A domestic abuse limit (accessed 4 October 2026)
CPS: Strangulation and suffocation (updated 13 November 2025) — points to prove for s.75A, ordinary meaning of strangle and suffocate, intentional act for strangulation versus intentional or reckless battery for suffocation, no injury needed, consent defence limits, applies outside domestic abuse (accessed 4 October 2026)
College of Policing: NPPF sergeants' step-two legal examination, subject area breakdown, March 2026 (PDF) — we counted the rows by skill: six Non-fatal offences against the person and two General defences among 140 scored questions; the College says the breakdown is only valid for March 2026 (accessed 4 October 2026)
College of Policing: NPPF step two legal examinations candidate handbook 2026 (PDF, September 2025), Appendix A — Blackstone's Police Manual 2026 chapter list used in the chapter map; all chapters apply to both ranks except 1.8 (accessed 4 October 2026)

Related Guides

On this topic elsewhere

Use of Force and Human Rights → Lethal force, Article 2 and the human rights material this page leaves out. Use of Force Test for Supervisors → The legal test for force, written for the supervisor's role. Public Order Offences → The neighbouring chapter on fear, violence and disorder. PACE Searches and Arrest → The powers behind lawful arrest and reasonable force. Theft, Robbery and Burglary → Where violence meets property offences. What Comes Up → The published subject breakdowns in detail.

Sergeant and inspector exams

More in this guide series

Also on PolicePay

Practice and tools

Toolkit Exam prep toolkit Hundreds of practice questions, timed sittings, progress tracking and board practice. Practice Sergeant sample questions Free practice questions with full explanations. Practice Inspector sample questions Free practice questions with full explanations. Hub Promotion hub Every promotion guide in one place.

Disclaimer

PolicePay.co.uk is an independent guide. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by or produced by the College of Policing or Oxford University Press (Blackstone's). Exam rules, dates, syllabus editions and prices change, so check the College of Policing's current candidate handbook and exam pages before you register or buy. Practice material on this site is original and is not real exam content. Details apply to England and Wales unless stated. Details are as checked on 4 October 2026.

Non-Fatal Offences and Defences