As a conservative I can say this about the topic:
Wgaf?
Personally, I believe that an assault charge requires some injury to the alleged victim.
Because the thrown sandwich (even if stale as ****) couldn’t actually have caused any injury, the behavior was not even an attempted assault. Juvenile? Yep. Ineffective? Yep.
But an assault? I don’t buy it.
The statute does not define “assault” directly — so courts interpret it according to federal common law. Under federal precedent (e.g.,
United States v. Chestaro, 197 F.3d 600, 605–06 (2d Cir. 1999)), “assault” under § 111 generally means:
- A willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon another person, coupled with an apparent present ability to do so, or
- Any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm.
How ridiculous.