Lably
Skip to content

Mayhem (crime)

Criminal offence consisting of the intentional maiming of another person

  • 3 min read
  • 5 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Crime, Combat and Disability

Under the law of England and Wales and other common law jurisdictions, it originally consisted of the intentional and wanton removal of a body part that would handicap a person's ability to defend themselves in combat. Under the strict common law definition, initially this required damage to an eye or a limb, while cutting off an ear or the nose was not deemed to be sufficiently disabling. In the many years since, the meaning of the crime expanded to encompass any type of mutilation, disfigurement, or crippling act done using any instrument.

England

History of definitions

In England and Wales, it has fallen into de facto disuse. In 1992 the Law Commission recommended that it be abolished, and in 1998 the Home Office proposed to abolish it, in the course of codifying the law relating to offences against the person.

Fetter v. Beale

The most significant change in common-law mayhem doctrine came in 1697, when the King's Bench decided Fetter v. Beale, 91 Eng. Rep. 1122. There, the plaintiff recovered in a battery action against a defendant. Shortly thereafter, "part of his skull by reason of the said battery came out of his head", and the plaintiff brought a subsequent action under mayhem. Though Fetter is also known as an early example of res judicata, it is most significant for expanding the ambit of mayhem to include "loss of the skull".

Sign in to keep reading

4 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Politics and economics