criminal-law civil-law
Can a person purposely provoke someone to hit him and then report a crime?
<p>Say someone purposely provokes another person by insulting him, knowing that this person is easily provoked.</p>
<p>The provoked person then hits him.</p>
<p>Can the person then report a crime or even file a civil lawsuit on his assaulter, all in the aim of getting that person behind bars?</p>

<p>It is legal to insult a person (at least in the US: it's a crime in Indonesia). It is legal to report a crime. It is therefore legal to insult a person and report the ensuing crime. The law assumes that a person has enough self-control that they will not commit a crime when insulted. A person who hurls the insult might be found contributorily negligent, which could reduce the assailant's liability or even eliminate it, depending on the state.</p>

<p>People hurling abuse at one another and starting fights happens absolutely all the time, especially when drink has been taken, and will be a regular part of police business.</p>
<p>In the UK, potentially both parties can be prosecuted; the <a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/verbal-abuse-and-harassment-public" rel="noreferrer">Public Order Act</a> prohibits &quot;abusive or threatening words or behaviour&quot;. It specifically prohibits provocation: &quot;to provoke the immediate use of unlawful violence by that person or another&quot;. However, because it's the <em>public</em> order act it only applies in public places and not in houses.</p>

<p>Just broadly speaking, the law doesn't operate in black and white.</p>
<p>If you act in a manner that encourages somebody to strike you (especially with the ultimate intention to get them to do so), that is certainly a factor the judge would look at when deciding punishment. So you may just end up with a broken nose, and they may just have to pay a nominal fine.</p>
<p>Also, without knowing what your jurisdiction is, it's almost certainly the case, that suing them will not result them going to jail.</p>

<p>It depends on the jurisdiction. pjc50 has given a link to the law in the UK. In the USA, what you are talking about is known legally as <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fighting_words" rel="noreferrer">&quot;fighting words.&quot;</a></p>
<p>The US Supreme Court has recognized that some speech is so offensive that it has no First Amendment protection. Such &quot;fighting words&quot; &quot;by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.&quot;</p>
<p>This doctrine, and successive decisions upholding it, have been criticized because it limits the apparently absolute protection of speech in the First Amendment. <a href="https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&amp;context=mulr" rel="noreferrer">Here</a> is an exhaustive discussion of that idea.</p>
<p>In some states, an immediate retaliation, in the form of a punch to the face (the &quot;Fist Amendment&quot;), was once viewed as fair. At least, the police and other authorities recognized that there was little chance of an insulted person who delivered violence in return being convicted by a jury. This was enforced unfairly, of course, according to the prejudices of local law enforcement.</p>
<p>That is no longer the case anywhere in the US. The &quot;fighting words&quot; are disorderly conduct, and a punch in return is a battery. The police will arrest both of you, or if there is no serious physical harm, more likely suggest you call it a night and sober up.</p>
<p>A civil suit by either party is a possibility, and will inevitably result in a countersuit. Neither person can go to jail for losing a civil suit, no lawyer should get involved in such a suit, and a sensible judge will tell the parties that nobody wins, so shake hands.</p>
