If someone swings his fist in your face to intimidate you, are you justified in hitting him in self-defense?
<p>When Bob is angry arguing with his friend Harry, he tries to intimidate him by swinging his fist in Harry's face a few centimeters away, without actually hitting him.</p>
<p>If Harry hits Bob in self-defense (even though Bob's fist never touched him), who will be charged and whose fault is it under US law?</p>

<h2>Both Bob and Harry have performed the actus rea of assault</h2>
<p>Bob has no defense.</p>
<p>Harry has a potential self-defense defense. In the US the onus is on Harry to prove on the balance of probabilities that it was self-defense. In other common law jurisdictions the state must prove beyond reasonable doubt that it <em>wasn’t</em>.</p>
<p>Notwithstanding, whether the responsible party has met their burden is up to the trier of fact (jury or judge). If the facts as you state the can be proved, Bob is guilty and Harry is not guilty.</p>

united-states assault