Aggravated Criminal Damage Flashcards
Aggravated Criminal Damage is an offence under what section of the Criminal Damage Act 1971?
S 1(2)
What is aggravated criminal damage?
A) intending or being reckless as to damage or destroy property
B) intending to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be endangered
Where must the danger to life come from?
Danger to life must be from the destruction or damage, not from another source in which damage was caused.
Why was the defendant in Steer 1987 found to be not guilty of aggravated criminal damage?
The damage caused by the defendant firing shots at a house was a broken window. As the danger must come from the damage caused, the defendant was not guilty of the aggravated offence because the breaking of a window does not pose a high risk to life. Any danger to life would have come from the shots fired.
Which two cases demonstrate the fact that the damage caused must endanger the life of another?
Webster 1995 - where the defendant threw a paving stone onto the roof of a moving train
Warwick 1995 - where the defendant threw a brick at a car causing the glass to smash
Does life actually have to be endangered?
No. The test is subjective and so it must be assessed whether the defendant realised that a life MIGHT be at risk. If the defendant was aware that there was a risk, they would be guilty, even if no actual risk was present.
Which case demonstrated the fact that life need not actually be endangered?
Sangha 1988.
D set fire to a mattress in an empty flat. As there was a risk to the other people in the block of flats, the defendant was guilty of the offence.
Can the defendant be guilty of the aggravated offence if the property destroyed/damaged is their own?
Yes. If the defendant places another life in danger as a result of their actions, then they are guilty of the aggravated offence.
What are the mens rea elements for the aggravated criminal damage offence?
1) intention or recklessness as to destroying or damaging any property
2) intention or recklessness as to whether life is endangered by the destruction or damage
Which cases demonstrate that recklessness is tested subjectively?
Cooper 2004 and Castle 2004 both follow G and R 2003 in highlighting the fact that Caldwell recklessness is no longer appropriate and that Cunningham recklessness should be adopted instead.
