Arson Flashcards
Intentionally Meaning
Deliberate act:
“Intent” means that act or omission must be done deliberately. The act or omission must be more than involuntary or accidental.
Intent to produce a result:
The second type of intent is an intent to produce a specific result. In this context result means “aim, object, or purpose”. Simester and Brookbanks
Proving Intent
The onus is generally on the prosecution to prove an offender’s intent beyond reasonable doubt.
While an offender’s admissions as to their intent are potentially good evidence, it is good practice to support these with circumstantial evidence from which their intent can also be inferred.
In R v Collister2 two Police officers were charged with demanding with menaces after causing a man to believe he would be arrested for soliciting homosexual acts unless he paid them money. Although no express demand for money was made, it was held that the defendants’ intent could be inferred from the circumstances
Recklessness
Acting “recklessly” involves consciously and deliberately taking an unjustifiable risk.
It must be proved not only that the defendant was aware of the risk and proceeded regardless (a subjective test), but also that it was unreasonable for him to do so (an objective test).
In R v Harney3 the defendant was convicted of murder after stabbing the victim in the stomach during an altercation. He argued unsuccessfully that he had been aiming for the victim’s leg knowing he could have seriously injured the man, but denied wanting to kill him.
Proving Recklessness
When Recklessness is an element in an offence the following must be proved:
- That the defendant consciously and deliberately ran a risk (a subjective test)
- That the risk was one that was unreasonable to take in the circumstances as they were known to the defendant (objective test – based on whether a reasonable person would have taken the risk).
Types of fire damage
Although fire damage will often involve burning or charring, it is not necessary that the property is actually set alight; melting, blistering of paint or significant smoke damage may be sufficient.
What is fire?
Fire is the result of the process of combustion, a chemical reaction between fuel and oxygen, triggered by heat. For fire to start or continue, each of the three elements - fuel, oxygen and heat - must be present in the correct proportions.
Definition of an explosive
Section 2 Arms Act 1983
Explosive
(a) Means any substance or mixture or combination of substances which in its normal state is capable either of decomposition at such rapid rate as to result in an explosion or of producing a pyrotechnic effect; and
(b) Without limiting paragraph (a) of this definition, includes gunpowder, nitroglycerine, dynamite, gun-cotton, blasting powder, fulminate of mercury or of other metals, coloured flares, fog signals, fuses, rockets, percussion caps, detonators, cartridges, and ammunition of all descriptions; and
(c) Without limiting paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of this definition, includes any device, contrivance, or article, which uses any substance or mixture or combination of substances to which paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of this definition applies as an integral part of it for the purposes of producing an explosion or a ballistic or pyrotechnic effect; but does not include a firearm; and
(d) Does not include any firework as defined in section 2 of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.
Definition of Property
Section 2 Crimes Act 1961
Interpretation
Property includes real and personal property, and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, [money, electricity,] and any debt, and any thing in action, and any other right or interest
Property under s267(1)(a)
Matters such as the nature, value and ownership of the property are not relevant; it is the risk to another person’s life that raises this offending to the highest category of arson.
Property under s267(1)(b) & (c)
By contrast, paragraphs (b) & (c) deal only with property that is, in general, higher in value - immovable property, vehicles, ships and aircraft. It is the value of these items that raises the offending to the higher category.
Knows or ought to know meaning
The first question (the subjective test) is: what was the defendant thinking at the time? Did the defendant know that human life was likely to be endangered by his actions?
If there is insufficient evidence that the defendant was conscious of the risk, the next question (the objective test) is: what would a reasonable person have thought in the same circumstances? Would a reasonable person have recognised the risk?
Danger to life
“Life” in this context means human life, and the danger must be to the life of someone other than the defendant.
Without claim of right definition
Section 2, Crimes Act 1961
Interpretation
claim of right, in relation to any act, means a belief [[at the time of the act in a proprietary or possessory right in property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed]], although that belief may be based on ignorance or mistake of fact or of any matter of law other than the enactment against which the offence is alleged to have been committed.]
Nature of belief required for without claim of right
First the belief must be a belief in a proprietary or possessory right in property. That is, there must be a belief that relates to an element of ownership of the property in question or a right to take or retain possession of it. In this context “property” may include, in appropriate cases, intangible property which cannot be possessed but may be owned.
Secondly the belief must be about rights to the “property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed”. A belief that the defendant had proprietary or possessory rights in relation to other property and was therefore in some way justified in taking or dealing with the property in regard to which the offence was allegedly committed will not be relevant or sufficient.
Thirdly the belief must be held at the time of the conduct alleged to constitute the offence.
Fourthly, the belief must be actually held by the defendant. In Hayes v R7 the Court held that the belief is not required to be reasonable or be reasonably held and may be based on ignorance or mistake. However the reasonableness of the belief may be relevant in determining whether the defendant’s assertion of the belief is credible.
Immovable property meaning
Property will be considered immovable if it is currently fixed in place and unable to be moved, even though it may be possible to make it movable. Therefore, for example, a relocateable building which is currently fixed to foundations is “immovable” even if, with the expenditure of labour, it could be released from its foundations and transported elsewhere.