One night, Jacob is walking home from his shift at a bar. Steven walks up behind him and holds up his index finger to Jacob’s back; Jacob believes it is a gun. Steven instructs him to walk to the adjacent alley, kneel on the ground facing the wall, and orders Jacob to give him all his money, valuables, and cell phone. Steven threatens Jacob and tells him not to make any sound or Steven will shoot him. After Steven leaves, Jacob quickly reports the crime and a patrol car was sent to canvas the location. Steven is found with Jacob’s items and is subsequently arrested. Is Steven liable for attempted battery assault? Why or why not? Is Steven liable for assault of placing another in fear of a battery? Why or why not

An assault refers to an attempt or threat to injure another person, while battery refers to the act of touching someone in a harmful way. This occurs when someone tries to physically strike someone else, or when he acts in a manner that puts the other person in fear of immediate harm. Sometimes, a category of "aggravated" assault or battery is used when the person used a deadly weapon.

In this case, Steven is not liable for attempted battery or battery. This is because he employed his finger, and not a gun or other weapon. Therefore, he lacked the ability to commit the battery, as well as the steps toward the commission of the battery.

However, Steven would be liable for assault, as he placed another in fear of battery. Jacob had reason to fear the possibility of bodily harm. This is because Jacob had every reason to believe that Steven was capable and willing to cause him harm.

it gave them more rights

the use of electrical signals that transit messages is know as