4. Robbery, Blackmail & Burglary Flashcards
ROBBERY
Def: Stealing, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, using force on any person or putting or seeking to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force (s.8(1) TA 1968)
Max S: Life (s.8(2) TA 1968)
Robbery: ACTUS REUS
AR: stealing using force or threats of force on any person, putting that person in fear or seeking to put them in fear of being subjected to force immediately before or at the time of theft
- STEALING (Theft)
- AR for theft must be met (Corcoran v Anderton)
- i.e. Appropriation, Property, Belonging to Another - USING FORCE OR THREATS OF FORCE
- “force” not defined in TA 1968, is down to jury to decide whether acts constitute the use of “force”.
REQ: CONTACT with V, this may be (P and Others v DPP):
- DIRECT: where such force is used it can be minimal (R v Dawson and James)
- INDIRECT: may be exerted through property (R v Clouden), BUT must not be too minimal (P and Others v DPP)
NB: in neither case is the force needed to be violent. - PUTS A PERSON IN FEAR OF BEING THEN AND THERE SUBJECTED TO FORCE
- V must APPREHEND that force WILL be used against them (Grant v CPS)
- NO req. that D actually applies force or that V is afraid of the threatened force (R v DPP) - SEEKING TO PUT A PERSON IN FEAR OF BEING THEN AND THERE SUBJECTED TO FORCE
- so long as D intends that V believe they will be subjected to force, it is irrelevant whether V is aware of/apprehends the threat of force (R v Taylor) - ON ANY PERSON
- use or threat of force can be directed towards persons other than the victim - IMMEDIATELY BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF STEALING
- subject to provision that appropriation CAN be a continuous act, so use/threat of force can occur before or after the actual theft PROVIDED that the force was used for the purpose of stealing (R v Hale per Eveliegh LJ cf R v Donaghy and Marshall)
Robbery: MENS REA
MR: Dishonesty, intention to permanently deprive and to use force in order to steal.
Mr for theft is required to establish a robbery:
- Dishonesty
- Intention to permanently deprive
- intention to use force in order to steal
- – intention has ordinary meaning (R v Moloney per Lord Bridge)
- – As long as D intended to use force to steal, it does not matter WHEN D intended to use that force (R v Hale)
BURGLARY
There are 3 burglary offences:
- Burglary (s.9(1)(a) TA 1968)
- Burglary (s.9(1)(b) TA 1968)
- Aggravated Burglary (s.10 TA 1968)
Burglary: BURGLARY s.9(1)(a)
Max S: 14 years
Point when offence committed: Upon ENTRY
- unlike s.9(1)(b), D NEED NOT actually commit an ulterior offence, merely intend it.
AR: Entry of a building (or part of a building) as a trespasser
- ENTRY: this occurs when (R v Ryan):
- any part of D’s body enters the property
- entry need not be substantial or effective to constitute entry. - BUILDING: must be a ‘structure of considerable size intended to be permanent or at least endure for a considerable time’ (Stevens v Gourley)
- includes inhabited vehicles/vessel regardless of whether the inhabitant currently occupies it (s.9(4)).
- – a food storage freezer contained, DETACHED from chassis, on property for 2 years, YES (B and S Leathley)
- – Contained on a wheeled chassis, fitted with electric for food storage, NO (Norfolk Constab. v Seekings and Gould) - PART OF A BUILDING: certain areas within a building can be “parts” depending on whether they require authorisation to enter (R v Walkington)
- TRESPASSER: D will be trespasser in two possible situations:
- owner of property does NOT CONSENT to their entry
- – D must ENTER as a Tpasser, not sufficient to enter legitimately but then become a Tpasser (R v Laing)
- where D enters building IN EXCESS of the permission granted by the owner (R v Jones and Smith).
…
MR: Knowing or being reckless as to Tpass and at the time of entry intending to steal, inflict GBH or to unlawfully damage the building or anything therein
- KNOWLEDGE OR RECKLESSNESS AS TO TPASS
- D must know/be reckless to their Tpass at:
- – time of ENTRY, AND
- – in FACT, not in law (R v Collins) - INTENTION TO STEAL, INFLICT GBH OR DO UNLAWFUL DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING OR ANYTHING THEREIN (s.9(2))
- D must intend to do any one of these actions at the point of entry
- Conditional intent will suffice (AG’s Ref. (No. 1 and 2 of 1979), i.e. only do something iff…`
Burglary: BURGLARY s.9(1)(b)
Point when offence committed: the COMMISSION/att. commission of the ULTERIOR OFFENCE.
AR: Having entered as a Tpasser a building or part thereof, stealing, attempting to steal, inflicting or attempting to inflict GBH.
D must satisfy AR for s.9(1)(a):
- Entry, Building (or a part), Tpasser, AND
4. COMMITTING/ ATTEMPTING TO COMMIT THEFT OR GBH - Theft/att. theft: FULL AR needed for either crime.
- – Theft: Appropriation of property belonging to another
- – Att Theft: an act more than merely preparatory for the commission of theft.
- GBH/att. GBH
- – “Inflicting GBH” covers numerous offences (s.18, 20 and 23 OAPA).
- – Att. s.18, 20, or 23: an act more than merely preparatory to their commission.
…
MR: Knowing or being reckless as to Tpass and the MR for theft/GBH
- KNOWLEDGE/RECKLESSNESS AS TO TPASS
- same as for s.9(1)(a), IN FACT, not in law. - MR FOR THEFT/GBH
- Theft: Dishonestly with intention to deprive permanently
- s.20 OAPA: maliciously with intent or reckless as to causing SOME harm
- s.18 OAPA: intention to cause GBH
- s.23 OAPA: intention to cause GBH
NB: possible, yet not confirmed, that no MR is necessary at all where GBH is actually committed (R v Jenkins).
Burglary: AGGRAVATED BURGLARY (s.10)
Max S: Life (s.10(2))
AR: Committing burglary having with them any firearm or imitation firearm, weapon of offence or explosive
- COMMITTING BURGLARY
- AR for either s.9(1)(a OR b) - HAS WITH THEM ANY FIREARM/WEAPON OF OFFENCE/EXPLOSIVE
- Has with them: must have the article with them when they commit the burglary
- – for s.9(1)(a) at ENTRY
- – for …(b) when committing ulterior offence (R v O’Leary)
- means “carrying” with them (R v Klass)
- if D has article with them on entry but at that stage lacks intent to steal, will not commit AGG BURG if discards of article before the theft (R v Francis)
- Firearm: includes airguns/pistols (s.10(1)(a))
- Imitation firearm: anything having the appearance of a firearm, need not be capable of firing (s.10(1)(a))
- Weapon of Offence: an article made/adapted for use to cause injury/incapacitate a person, or intended by D to have such a use (s.10(1)(b))
- – no req. for intent to actually use (R v Stones)
- – a weapon not made/adapted may become if D uses at the same moment of committing the theft (R v Kelly)
- Explosive: any article manufactured to produce a practical effect by explosion or intended by the possessor to have such a function (s.10(1)(c))
MR: same as for s.9(1)(a OR b), whichever is more appropriate.
s.9(1)(a): Knowing or being reckless as to Tpass and at the time of entry intending to steal, inflict GBH or to unlawfully damage the building or anything therein
s.9(1)(b): Knowing or being reckless as to Tpass and the MR for theft/GBH
BLACKMAIL
Def: D guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for themselves or another or with intent to cause loss to another, they make any unwarranted demand with menaces.
Max S: 14 years (s.21(3) TA 1968)
Blackmail: ACTUS REUS
AR: An unwarranted demand with menaces (s.21(1) TA 1968)
- DEMAND: not defined by TA 1968. Ordinary meaning used.
- A demand can be oral, in writing or through gestures.
- A demand may be explicit or implicit (Collitser v Warhurst)
- there is NO req. that the demand is effective in achieving its purpose. - MENACES: not defined by TA 1968, ordinary meaning should be used. i.e. actions/words that threaten harm or injury (R v Lawrence and Pomroy)
- is widely defined, includes “threat of any action detrimental or unpleasant to the person addressed (Thorne v MTA)
- TEST: a threat will be a menace if it is “of such a nature and extent that the mind of an ORDINARY person of normal stability and courage might be influenced or made apprehensive so as to accede unwillingly to the demand” (R v Clear; R v Harry) is an OBJ test.
- – EX 1: if threat affects V and D was aware that it was likely to do so, even though would not affect ordinary person, this can suffice (R v Garwood)
- Can be express or implied from circumstances (R v Lawrence and Pomroy)
- threat will be a menace regardless of whether V is influenced (R v Clear) or if it is directed elsewhere.
- D’s ability to carry out the threat is also irrelevant (R v Lambert (Lewis))
Blackmail: MENS REA
MR: an unwarranted demand made with a view to gain for themselves or another, or intention to cause a loss to another (s.21(1) TA 1968)
- UNWARRANTED (demand): a demand will be unwarranted UNLESS D subjectively (honestly) holds that they (s.21(1)); R v Lambert):
- have R grounds to make the demand (s.21(1)(a)), AND
- the use of menaces is a proper means of enforcing the demand (s.21(1)(b)).
- – a means will be “proper” only where it is lawful, NOT CRIMINAL (R v Harvey) - INTENTION TO GAIN OR CAUSE A LOSS
- Intention: basic meaning (R v Moloney per Lord Bridge)
- Gain: typical meaning, also includes keeping what one already has (s.34(2)(a)(i))
- Loss: typical meaning, also includes getting what one could have got (s.34(2)(a)(ii))
GAIN/LOSS only extend to (s.34(a)):
- money and property
- – money includes the recovery of a debt (R v Lawrence and Pomroy)
- may be temporary or permanent gain/loss.
R, B and B: DEFENCES
ALL general defences are available for each of these offences.
- Self-Defence
- Intoxication
- duress
- consent
