As you are probably aware, Jussie Smollett, one of the actors on the show Empire, has been in the news lately. Initially, Jussie claimed that he had been assaulted but now it appears he might have hired his assailants. I don’t want to go into discussion of Jussie’s actions, because the matter is still under investigation and I want to know more before I jump to conclusions. As an aside, I’m a huge Empire fan, or I was until deadlines got in the way.
But this got me thinking. If I hire you to assault me and you do, can you still be charged with a crime?
My initial thought was no, since I’ve given my consent to the assault by paying you to do it. Entering a boxing, MMA, or wrestling match would mean you agree to be physically attacked and nobody is arresting boxers for repeatedly punching each other. However, when I asked this question on Twitter yesterday, someone mentioned that the state has an obligation to prevent violent crime and you can’t really consent to being harmed.
So the question for you today: can you give consent to be harmed and if you hire someone to beat you up, can they still be charged with a crime? Please let us know which country you are from when discussing particular laws so we don’t get confused.
Please be aware that all this might show up in a future book, so by posting here you give us consent to use your wise counsel for fiction purposes. 😉
From what I’ve read, he paid the two men and rehearsed the “attack” with them. He then filed a complaint with the police, sworn statement and all.
I was pretty sure this was phoney when I read he redacted his phone records. I think he should be prosecuted and billed for all the wasted man hours with mandatory jail time. It’s past time for the lieing liberals who do this crap to pick up the price tag for their foul behavior.
No comments on the actual current legal issues. But this topic reminds me of a short story I read forever ago. I cannot recall the title or author.
It was set way in the future and probably on a different planet. There were three characters, all at an extremely high end restaurant. The “entertainment” was a young woman who was slowly being consumed by a large (alien) plant. Some of the story was told from this woman’s perspective, but the bulk was a conversation between two diners. One was aghast at what was being “allowed” to happen (murder, suicide, take your pick). The second diner was probing at this person’s take on the other society’s values. He explained that on this world, the young woman had every right to enter into a contract to die in this fashion. The compensation would go to her family and would pay for medical bills for her younger brother’s illness, which the family couldn’t afford to pay on their own. The plant was exuding some set of chemicals that numbed all pain and would eventually cause the woman to lose consciousness before actually dying–so there was no physical suffering. But she was definitely awake and her rationale was made public, which were key to the “entertainment” for the patrons, beforehand.
I found the story very difficult to read. Obviously, the young woman was not “saved,” which my younger brain very much wanted to occur.
Gah, that is awful. You gave me the willies or heeby-jeebies. There is a lot of disturbing there. Why is the girl’s life less important than her brother’s? I am most bothered by the thought of a society that watches death as entertainment. To much like gladiator pits and dehumanizing each other. Shudders.
Just to put forward a counter view – why is society at large allowed to decide the worth of anyone’s (the girl’s) life? If she values it herself as below her brother’s, then shouldn’t society accept that? (Kinda how vampires are made in kate daniel’s world). Society should always be such that each individual feels valued, safe, worthwhile, competent (knowing all choices – practical and moral) to choose serious life (and death) choices.
I personally do find the idea of the story horrifying, but maybe in a completely utopian world, where this wasn’t the *only* option, it has space to exist? Although, if there *was* literally *any* other choice to save her brother, why would the girl want to die, and not live to see her brother well?
If I go to a martial arts class & am injured during a practice it seems unlikely that I could get the police to file criminal charges or if filed that the other participant would be found guilty. Of course, most sporting/training facilities require a hold harmless form to be signed.
Hi! I only know how it works in Sweden (and it’s probably going to be similar in the other Nordic countries) but here it goes: In Sweden you can consent to being beaten up but only up to a degree, if the injuries are too serious the consent doesn’t “matter” anymore because the state has an interest and responsibility to prevent crime and keep its citizens from harm. So there’s a fine line between less-serious injuries that you can consent to and more harmful ones where consent doesn’t prevent the attacker from being found guilty of assault. In Sweden we call the lesser degree “ringa” (sort of a slight assault) and then there’s the normal assault and in nearly all situations you can consent to the lesser assault but not to a normal (or for that case the even more serious degree) assault. The difference between assault and say boxing (in Sweden, at least) isn’t in the fact that you’ve agreed to be beaten up (as the consent isn’t going to cover most injuries) but in the fact that we as a society have decided that boxing and other sports are okay and that we see them as socially acceptable. So as long as the competitors stay within the “idea” of the sport – they can even go beyond the rules as long as they don’t go completely nuts and go beyond the idea or spirit of the sport – that person’s actions will be socially acceptable and therefore not punishable.
Hope the answer helps!
// Law student excited at finally getting to use some knowledge outside of the classroom
I am from Greece, and the law in my country goes like this:
There are different types of injuries that can be incurred and, depending on those, there are different consequences.
If the injury is a simple one, meaning no real severity, then the victim’s consent means that the assault is not a crime, as long as the assault is not contrary to accepted principles of morality (which of course, is a matter of interpretation by the court, or the prosecutor who files the charges).
In any other case, i.e. when the injury occurs in a “dangerous” way (a way that could cause danger to the victim’s life, or a serious injury – for example, if you use your fist on someone’s face), or when the injury was severe, then the victim’s consent does not have any bearing on the filing of criminal charges. Of course, I suppose it will be taken into account when the penalty is decided by the court.
I hope my answer wasn’t too convoluted.
Hi! I’m from the U.S. and I’m involved with 2 different martial arts (Krav Maga and Brazilian Ju Jitsu), we try to be careful, but sometime accidents happen. I personally have never had worse than a black eye (which got me quite a few questions as I’m a rather small, young looking female, and my husband is large, grumpy looking military man). That said, one of my classmates had to go to the ER recently when she got her nose broken and possibly a concussion. She was asked by the police officers in the ER if she wanted to press charges, when she declined saying it was a training accident they were fine with letting it go at that. I’m not sure precisely where the line is drawn for legal consent, but so far it has been drawn further out than any of the training injuries I’ve seen. I really hope it stays that way.
My dirty mind went right to BDSM; in Switzerland (civil law tradition) it constitutes a kind of gray area. In any case there should be an agreement and ideally even a witness (to the agreement). Most agreed upon practices are ok, but grievous/serious bodily harm (like organ damage, for instance) and death (resulting from asphyxiation games or heart attack or whatever) are prosecuted ex officio (so there is going to be an inquest at the least); in general less serious bodily harm (like a blue eye or even a broken arm) is an offense that is only prosecuted upon request anyway!
With regard to contact sports and martial arts, even grievous bodily harm (including resulting in death) are not punishable crimes as long as it can be shown that (all) the rules were observed and necessary protective measures were installed. Even a slight breach of the rules might not be punishable if the perpetrator could not have foreseen the consequences (there it depends on the circumstances and the judge)…
I’m not sure if someone you hired to beat you up should be charged for that assault but it seems like if the guy who beats you up knows it was intended to stage and report a false crime they should be charged with that just like the so called victim should be. That’s a serious crime that wastes police time and effort and causes unnecessary stress on others who live in the area. It’s much more serious than a simple assault charges.
Also, in a case of hiring a thug to send a threatening letter to your place of business, that’s meant to scare everyone else, the fake victim knows it’s not real but his colleagues at his business don’t. So the fake victim can’t consent for his colleagues because he’s in league with the bad guy. The bad guy he hired created and sent a threatening letter though the Postal Service which is a federal crime in the US. So again they should both be charged with the same crime.
Pretty much yes, in the US. You don’t press charges, don’t file a false police report and don’t try to use it to defraud anyone for anything and they should be ok. Of course they can’t kill you, or the state will press charges.
There are some exceptions. Such as domestic violence, many jurisdictions the state/county/city will prosecute even if you refuse to press charges yourself or even corporate with them.
Thanks for stating the real reality.
I’m in the US. I think the idea of consenting to be harmed is a big gray area, because generally the law would not get involved if it was consensual (if you consented, you’re not likely to call 911).
S&M is a good example of consenting to be harmed. But…The law doesn’t say assault is illegal unless you have the assaultee’s permission, it says it’s illegal. I assume in cases of S&M, they just don’t define it as assault, even though by textbook definition, it is. This is why I say consenting is a gray area. I don’t think it’s consistent logic, because the law wasn’t really designed to deal with cases where people are being harmed voluntarily. If you take things a step further, what if you paid someone to kill you? Being paid and you consenting to be killed does not mean that they didn’t murder you (this is why euthanasia is so tricky).
Martial arts are activities that have a known/expected risk (rather than consenting to be attacked, it’s more like you accept the risk you might be harmed in the course of this activity). But if someone started beating you outside the accepted rules, then it could transform into assault. For example: a match has been declared over, and the winner keeps hitting the loser.
However, you certainly can’t pay someone to assault you and then report it as assault and not break the law. That’s an entirely different criminal issue – and if the assailants know that the intent is to make a fraudulent report, then they’re accomplices.
Take it one step further…what if you hire someone to “assault” you and they wind up killing you…are they innocent because you hired them?…..or a bystander sees this and jumps in to help, and is hurt or killed…or you use the “hire” as an excuse to murder the person you hired by responding to the attack with deadly force and killing the person you hired…..or….
Tennessee lawyer here (although I do commercial law, haven’t touched criminal law in decades). Tennessee’s criminal law says that you can be charged with assault, but it’s a defense to the charge if the victim gave consent and you don’t seriously hurt them.
As other commenters have said, pretty much no one is going to be arrested unless somebody else complains. If the victim keeps his mouth shut and the assault doesn’t happen in a busy, public place, then…pics or it didn’t happen.
But if you’re hiring someone to beat the crap out of you in order to defraud your employer or insurer or whatever, you can still be charged with the fraud. I don’t actually know if bully-for-hire can be criminally liable for helping you commit fraud, but they definitely can be liable civilly (meaning that the person you defrauded can sue you for fraud and sue the bully-for-hire for helping you with it) — that’s a concept covered in the section 876 of the 2nd Restatement of Torts.
——————-
TCA §39-13-104 – Effective consent:
When conduct is charged to constitute an offense under this part because it causes or threatens bodily injury, effective consent to such conduct or to the infliction of such injury is a defense, if:
(1) The bodily injury consented to or threatened by the conduct consented to is not serious bodily injury; or
(2) The conduct and the harm are reasonably foreseeable hazards:
(A) Of joint participation in a lawful athletic contest or competitive sport; or
(B) For any concerted activity of a kind not forbidden by law.
———————
Restatement of Torts § 876 (1934 & 2004 Supp.):
For harm resulting to a third person from the tortious conduct of another, a
person is liable if he:
(a) orders or induces such conduct, knowing of the conditions under which the act is done or intending the consequences which ensue, or
(b) knows that the other’s conduct constitutes a breach of duty and gives substantial assistance or encouragement to the other so to conduct himself, or
(c) gives substantial assistance to the other in accomplishing a tortious result and his own conduct, separately considered, constitutes a breach of duty to the third person.
——————-
I believe it could be argued that “assault for hire” is a crime unto itself, regardless of the intended victim
People consent to being harmed all the time. e.g. sado-masochism sessions, contact sports like American football, ice hockey, boxing, & fight clubs, participating Jackass type videos, body hair waxing, body piercings, tattoos, vanity surgeries, use of toxic chemical laden products such as cosmetics & perfume/cologne, knowingly ingesting painfully hot peppers
A lot of the assault complaints/indictments I see contain the phrase ‘without their consent ‘ suggesting that with consent it wouldn’t be a crime. On the other hand I’ve seen 2 guys convicted of battery who claimed they were only pretending to fight to see what the cops would do. Frankly, it probably depends which state you are in. You would not believe how much the laws and their interpretation vary by state!
Yes you can agree to be beaten up. Ask any hospital, people pay them to cut others up and nobody is arresting anyone.
All joking aside, in Germany, we explicitly have a thing that roughly translates as ~justification reasons (Rechtfertigungsgründe).
Among other reasons such as self-defence, consent is such a justification, rendering these acts not-punishable.
Now, I don’t know how serious whatshisname was beaten up, but there is a border beyond which consent doesn’t matter anymore. At the very latest assisted suicide is illegal, but I would guess the bar is lower than “lethal”, I just don’t know where it actually is.
In Romania, if you consent to be beaten or whatever, I’ m fairly sure the police will laugh their heads off and probably you’ll take one or two smacking from them too.
If you have a contract (legally binding, notorized, witnessed,or whatever) it shouldn’t be considered a crime, but who knows these days. People can sue you for almost anything anymore. Governments are able to twist some laws to their advantage. That was not meant as criticism of any particular country or government system, just a general comment. Please don’t be mean to me.? Personal opinion. US citizen.
The Czech legal system doesn’t give much wiggle room in this case. Individuals can write down the agreement. It will be valid, but faulty as this kind of agreement is considered illegal. The assailant can still be prosecuted, even if both sides agreed on the violence in writing. (Not much help, I know… but it’s very interesting to see how each country deals with this stuff.)
I’m not very good at the language of the country I am currently residing (Israel), but I found a partial translation of something from 1977 so there is a decent chance of it being outdated. Furthermore, the part regarding assault is missing.
In it, I think both the assaulted person and the assailant would be guilty of crimes. The assaulted person would be in violation of: enabling someone to commit an offense, procuring someone to commit an offense, and being in place for the offense to be ensured. In each of these cases, he would be guilty of actually committing assault himself.
But as other people have mentioned earlier, I think it mostly is if it gets reported. With the Jussie Smollett case, I think that if he gave consent then he is going to get screwed by either a law prohibiting consensual assault or a law about falsifying a police report.
In Canada, consent is a mean of defense, but it is restricted to the cases where the assault didn’t cause any bodily harm or an aggravated assault. The concept of «bodily harm » is defined (art.2 Criminal Code) as any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature. For example, red marks or ecchymosis, as well as broken teeths are considered bodily harm.
To answer your specific question, in Canada, the person hired that beat you could be charged.
The reflexion about martial arts, specifically MMA or other combat sports, is interesting. In the last few years, a few important contests in Montreal were canceled last minute, because the police told they were going to arrest the participants if it take place. The art. 83 Criminal Code forbids prize fights and planned fights, but some sports, such as boxing are permitted. There is also a few athletes that were prosecuted following brawls. It was mostly hockey players and those brawls took place during official matches.
Hi ! I’m from France, I think here being hired to beat people up would probably get you in troubles with the law. From what I read in the precedent comments, I think it’s the same in other countries. The fact that you consented to being beaten up doesn’t matter, someone harmed you and I think depending on the situation and the injuries the verdict would change. But I am now law specialist.
Regarding sports, my brother mainly did Kung Fu and box. He’s into sports and martial arts. The possibility of harming someone during a fight is accepted but using your skills to beat someone up outside the dojo could get you kick out of said dojo (that and the fact that the victim can “file a claim” (?) (“porter plainte”?)
I’m absolutely not sure but I think in Japan, it’s the same with people learning martial arts in dojos. If anyone sees you using your skills outside the dojo, even without causing injuries, you’re expelled of the dojo. I’m not sure sure it would mean you have problem with the law but it would mean fighting for sports is ok, beating people that may not have the skills outside the dojo is not. I’m not Japanese and I’ve never been there, I could totally be mistaken, Ã prendre avec des pincettes donc ?
Don’t know if those reflections help haha
Sending positive vibes your way ~
I know in the U.S.A you have to sign a contract. I remember having to hand it out (I worked at a MMA studio for a bit) and then signing it again when I became an adult. If I remember the waiver correctly, you are simply signing and saying that you won’t hold the gym responsible for your injuries, if you have any. You’re not consenting to assault at all. I did get curious, and the legal definition of assault is “An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal or civil liability” (https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assault). If you have a good MMA or other martial art studio, then they train you on how to avoid getting hurt. It’s inevitable for some injuries to happen, but the good places will work to minimize them. If you go on and do something like a boxing match, you have to sign another couple of forms. It’s an Injury Waiver and Release of Liability Form. So, basically, you’re being assaulted, but you’re signing away your right to charge your opponent for it. Additionally, because it is a sport and (hopefully) the people participating are involved in a legal ring (AKA, they follow the laws – medic present and other legal requirements) a certain amount of violence is expected (because sports aren’t tame. Ex: Hockey) so if the violence is retained in a certain area – or ‘field of play’ like a boxing ring, football field, hockey ring, and so long as the participants cease all violence between each other as soon as they step off the field of play, and so long as the violence does not exceed the acceptable level (they stop when they are told too. There’s really no set way to tell) then yes, the assault is legal. But, if it is not part of a sport, there is no field of play, and/or the use of force seems excessive to police, then it is assault and regardless of the victims consent, the DA can charge them. The victim can’t if he/she signed a waiver though.
Hi. I’m from Croatia.
As I understand the law (not a lawyer) the only difference is whether the assault will be considered with or without intent (planning to do a crime). If you do a crime and are unaware it is a crime you can get a milder punishment. And as others said, whether the assault is a crime will depend on the severity of the injury and the way it was done. Namely, it you disturb others with your actions it can be a crime but if it is considered part of a performance it will not. Also, it is stated in the law that inaction can be considered a crime as well so if you witness a crime and do nothing about it you are committing a crime even if it is of a lesser degree. Eg. someone is being assaulted and you just stand by any injuries they sustain are your fault to a degree as well. In the same direction, by just knowing an assault is going to happen and you do nothing, you are at fault.
To conclude, if the assault happened in public and/or there are injuries, it can go in front of a judge, even if both parties agreed to it. Both the person doing the assault and the person organising an assault are at fault but it can be consider without intent if neither was aware they were committing a crime.
I read all the comments so far and a lot of people mentioned BDSM. Basically it is illegal in a way any assault would be since it hasn’t been legally regulated in Croatia so far.
Another mention was tattoos and other procedures. It has been regulated in a way that no medical procedure is allowed to be done by a non licenced person and in a non licenced area. A tattooing and piercing are considered non-medical procedures (part of service industry) but most other procedures are.
A performance such as (sword) fighting, acting in a public place, a sports event and other requires prior permission from adequate authority.
Also, an activity that would be considered illegal can be done legally if prior consent is granted by the police. An example of this is running red lights and stopping traffic during private processions (funerals, weddings and such).
Finally, in Croatia, for any contract between two privat individuals to be legally binding, a notary has to approve it and you have to pay taxes if it involves monetary gain. One individual can be a company (called “obrt”) but a contract is in that case constrained to the work the company is registered to perform.
Oral contracts and contracts not notarised can be considered non-binding if contested.
This is a very interesting discussion..are these folks masochists that pay to be beaten?
Is it like Sand M behavior with a safe word?with out one ,try ouch?
I get the sport injuries ,heck I am not going to sue my horse if he accidentally hurts me..it’s my bad…and years ago I did a fairly hard form karate,so I got bruised under my blocking pads..
But wanting to get beat up for publicity , or to get pity.isn’t that some kind of Munchhausen? Or means a very slagging career or a damn bad actor to me…
Cheers,there is the Equestrian angle
I know in Australia we have a legal principle that’s usually shortened to Volenti, from the latin phrase ‘Volenti non fit injuria’, which translates roughly as ‘to one who is willing, no harm can be done’. Basically if you consent to something, it’s not a crime.
But, as several other people have said, there’s a line the law doesn’t allow ‘harm’ to cross, I think (from what I remember) because it’s assumed if you consent to a certain level of harm, you’re not considered capable of making the decision. So you definitely can’t consent to someone murdering you, anything that lands you in the hospital is probably a grey area at least, but your doctor can chop off a limb with the right paperwork and training.
There’s a lot more that goes into it (as always, with the law) but basically you have to know the extent of the risks before you’re able to consent. So if you hired someone to punch you a few times and they kept going until you ended up in hospital, it probably wouldn’t count.
Likewise if your relationship with the person precluded genuine consent- say your boss or a family member or partner pressured you until you agreed to something.
Basically though- yeah, hiring someone to hurt you is allowed. They might get in trouble if they go too far, but you should be in the clear. Lying to the police about it is what would probably get you in trouble, and because of the news coverage it’s possible the attackers (if they were identificable) would have a case for slander.
I’d think it would revolve around intent. The person “assaulting” you wouldn’t be intending to inflict injuries on you out of malice. If it turned out you’d agreed with them to do it then I can’t see any jury in the world convicting unless an accident happens and you got more injured than intended. But then it would probably a different charge and you’d probably be held equally culpible. In theory the joint charge could be street-fighting. That is, the fight was joint and intentional and the fact that you hardly fought back and “lost” would be irrelevant.
Canadian here, which is probably why my first thought is “what about hockey?” In theory the fighting in hockey is against the rules and officially discouraged, and yet it happens all the time. How can you then not prosecute for assault? This is not boxing or martial arts. Hmmmmmm……
I am from the Philippines.
I am not a legal person but I have read a lot of instances where young people either sustain serious injuries or die as a consequence of hazing — an activity which most organizations find necessary for neophytes to undergo before they are fully accepted into the organization (e.g. fraternity/sorority, even the armed forces). If you chose to enter an organization with initiation rites it is understood that you consent to undergo such initiation. But if you get hurt excessively or die during the initiation, the perpetrators will be legally liable. Punishment depends on the damage that the person incurs. What kind of “damage” would merit legal action? Death, rape, sodomy or mutilation… if as a consequence of the assault the victim becomes physically and mentally incapacitated, impotent or blind.
Sadly, despite warnings and school sanctions, there are still a lot of young people who fall victim to this kind of violence.
This reminds me of that news article where a guy was charged with murder for killing and eating a “willing” victim he found by posting on the online forums.
I found his name:
Armin Meiwes
Pretty creepy wiki article
Yes you can consent to be harmed, but that doesn’t make the action condoned by the law. It’s wrong/illegal to assault another person (or animal). Hiring someone to burn your house down is illegal. The owner is fraudulent and the contractor is an arsonist, both committing crimes. Paying for a crime to be committed against their own person is instigating a crime. Accepting payment is agreeing to commit a crime.
From new Zealand. When two people are morons they both get in trouble.
In no civilized country can someone ask another for harm or worse, killing. In fact, all over the world, people go to jail for even assisting their dears with the most compassionate of suicides. This is about the Legal aspect. Of course Logic and Ethics could allow this.
*puts on librarian research glasses* (I’ve got the MA and work at the Bodleian I’m allowed them!)
Someone above made the interesting comment about doctors. So I’m just going to leave this news story from the BBC here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47198786. Note the comment: “Surgical procedures must be carried out by properly trained, qualified and regulated surgeons or healthcare professionals,” So in the UK you can ‘assault’ someone as long as you have a doctors licence and are regulated.
On to martial arts. As someone who did Tae Kwon Do as a teenager (got to black belt) I was told firmly that sparring was not the same as fighting. I had the safety equipment and had been trained to not hit in ways which were overly harmful (plus y’know the pads). However I was also warned about fighting outside the class. So…
England has two sections to assault . Which amount to (I simplify) the threat of violence etc. and the actual act of physical violence. (Common Assault and Battery) and then you get into ABH and GBH which I think are about the severity. We also have a bit about intent in the law – mens rea + actus reus = crime. Thus confirming to me that English law is difficult to work out!
There’s some interesting debate in this case: https://web.archive.org/web/20071016125514/http://lawteacher.net/Criminal/Non%20Fatal%20Assaults/Consent%20R%20v%20Brown.htm which outlines some of the legalese. Any barristers or solicitors in the comments do please disagree with me if I’ve got any of my research wrong! (As an information management professional I strive to find accurate sources)
Note: This is NOT the same in Scotland, where consent does not condone assault. (as far as I can work out)
Thanks for the very interesting post and comments!
Both parties should be charged, the victim for requesting the hit on themselves, and the assailant for going through with it + extra 5 years for stupidity to both.
My understanding is that the “attackers” were not charged with any crime because no crime was committed by them. Smollett, however, committed a felony under Illinois law immediately upon calling the police. “Disorderly conduct is normally thought of as a low-level crime. In Illinois, however, making false reports to peace officers is actually a felony contained within the disorderly statute. A false report is a class four felony, punishable by up to three years in prison.” I’m from the US.