|Part of the common law series|
|Element (criminal law)|
|Scope of criminal liability|
|Seriousness of offense|
|Offence against the person|
|Crimes against property|
|Crimes against justice|
|Defences to liability|
|Other common law areas|
Under the common 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 himself in combat. Under the strict common law definition, initially this required damage to an eye or a limb, while cutting off an ear or a nose was deemed not sufficiently disabling. Later the meaning of the crime expanded to encompass any mutilation, disfigurement, or crippling act done using any instrument.
History of definitions
|This article is outdated. (August 2011)|
In England and Wales, it has fallen into 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."
The modern doctrine
In the United States
Modern statutes in the U.S. define mayhem as disabling, disfiguring, such as rendering useless a member of another person's arms or legs. Cal. Pen. Code Sec. 203 The injury must be permanent, not just a temporary loss. Some courts will hold even a minor battery as mayhem if the injury is not minor. Mayhem in the U.S. is a felony.
Both the noun "mayhem" and the verb "maim" come from Old French via Anglo-Norman. The word is first attested in various Romance languages in the 13th century, but its ultimate origin is unclear. For one theory about its origin see wiktionary:mayhem.
Mayhem can describe a person going on a rampage. Popular misunderstanding of the common journalese expression "rioting and mayhem" caused the common usual modern use of "mayhem" to mean "havoc and disorder", often with humorous overtones: see wiktionary:mayhem.
- Edward Coke, Institutes of the Laws of England, Part 3, Chapter 53 (p.118) (1797 ed.)  (from Google Books).
- Edward Hyde East, Treatise of Pleas of the Crown, Volume 1, Chapter 7 (pp. 392 - 403) (1806 ed.)  (from Google Books).
- William Hawkins, Treatise of Pleas of the Crown, Book 1, Part 1, Chapter 15, Sections 1 - 12 (pp. 107 - 109) (1824 ed.)  (from Google Books).
- The Law Commission, Consultation Paper No.122, Offences Against the Person and General Principles, Appendix A, Draft Criminal Law Bill, clause 31(1)(a)(iii) at page 90 of the report 
- The Home Office. 1998. Violence: Reforming the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.  Draft Offences Against the Person Bill, clause 23
- Dix, George E. (2010). Gilbert Law Summaries on Criminal Law. Thomson/West. pp. 220–221. ISBN 978-0-314-19430-5.
- Oxford English Dictionary, Third edition, June 2000; online version June 2011
- John C. Klotter and Terry D. Edwards, Criminal Law, fifth edition (Anderson Publishing: Cincinnati, Ohio, 1998). ISBN 0-87084-527-6.
- Barbara Allen Babcok, Toni M. Massaro, and Norman W. Spaulding, Civil Procedure: Cases and Problems (Aspen Publishers: New York, NY 2006). ISBN 0-7355-5620-2.
|This article about a criminal law topic is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|