Assault & Violent Offence Solicitors
A charge of assault — from a minor altercation to a serious violent offence — can result in a custodial sentence, loss of employment, and a record that follows you for life. The defence must be built from the first contact with police.
Assault charges range from common assault — a summary-only offence triable only in the magistrates' court — to grievous bodily harm with intent under section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which can attract a life sentence. The facts, the intention, and the available defences determine everything. A specialist solicitor attends the police station, analyses the evidence, and prepares the strongest possible defence — whether by negotiating the charge level, challenging the prosecution case, or running a self-defence argument.
The Charges & Available Defences
Assault and violent offences — the charge hierarchy and how the defence is built.
The charge depends on the injury caused and the intention alleged. The defences available depend on the facts. A solicitor will assess both — and advise on the realistic outcome at each court level.
Common assault (section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988)
Common assault covers any unlawful touching or the apprehension of immediate unlawful force — no injury is required. It is summary-only, tried in the magistrates' court, and carries a maximum 6-month custodial sentence. A first offence is often disposed of by a fine or conditional discharge. A solicitor will review the prosecution evidence, advise on the prospects of a not guilty plea, and ensure the correct sentencing options are before the court — including community disposals that avoid a conviction or a custodial sentence.
Actual Bodily Harm (section 47 OAPA 1861)
ABH requires an assault that causes actual bodily harm — injury that is more than transient or trifling, including bruising, cuts, and minor psychiatric harm. It is triable either way — at the magistrates' or Crown Court. The maximum sentence is 5 years' imprisonment. A solicitor will analyse whether the injury meets the ABH threshold (which the prosecution must prove), whether there is a defence, and whether the case is better resolved at the magistrates' court (where sentencing powers are lower) or put to a jury at the Crown Court.
Grievous Bodily Harm (sections 18 and 20 OAPA 1861)
Section 20 GBH (unlawful wounding or inflicting GBH) requires serious injury but does not require proof of intent to cause it — maximum 5 years. Section 18 GBH (wounding with intent) requires the prosecution to prove the defendant intended to cause GBH or to resist arrest — maximum life imprisonment. The distinction between the two charges is critical to sentence. A solicitor will analyse the prosecution's evidence of intent — and where section 18 is charged but intent cannot be proved, negotiate or argue for a lesser charge at the appropriate stage.
Self-defence
Self-defence, defence of another, and defence of property are complete defences to assault charges where the force used was necessary and reasonable in the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. The defendant does not have to retreat before using force. A genuine mistake about the need for self-defence can be relied upon, even if the belief was unreasonable — but the force must have been reasonable given the (mistaken) belief. A solicitor will assess the evidence of threat, the response, and whether the self-defence argument is credible on the facts.
Affray and public order offences
Affray (section 3 Public Order Act 1986) requires threatening unlawful violence of a nature that would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for their personal safety. It is triable either way with a maximum of 3 years. Public order offences under sections 4 and 5 (fear or provocation of violence; harassment, alarm or distress) are summary-only. A solicitor will assess which charge is appropriate to the facts and whether the prosecution can prove the specific elements — including the requirement for a third-party bystander in affray.
CCTV, witness evidence, and prosecution disclosure
Most assault cases turn on the quality of the evidence — CCTV footage, witness accounts, and medical records of the injury. A solicitor will request full disclosure of all prosecution evidence and review it critically — identifying inconsistencies in witness accounts, gaps in the CCTV coverage, and whether the medical evidence is consistent with the prosecution's case. Where the evidence is weak or contradictory, a not guilty plea and trial can succeed. Where it is strong, early guilty plea mitigation prepares the best case for the lowest sentence.