Blackmail Flashcards
Which legislation defines blackmail?
Sections 21 Theft Act 1968
Sections 21 Theft Act 1968
1.
1) A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with the intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menances; and for this purpose a demand with menances is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief-
A that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand
B that the use of menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand
Section 21 of the Theft Act 1968
2
The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, and it is also immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand
What four elements need to be proven
- A demand
- Which is unwarranted
- Made with menaces
- With a view to gain or loss
Actus reus of blackmail
Demand
The demand does not have to be in a specific form
It could be written or it could be through words of conduct
The demand does not even have to made explicitly to the victim
Collister and Warhurst
Two police officers who suggested to the victim that he would be prosecuted for a crime unless he paid them some money
£5
Judgement of pitcher j in collister
Does not have to be an express demand in words
Demeanour of the accused and circumstances of the case would cause a reasonable man to understand a demand for money
And that such demand was accompanied by menaces so that his ordinary balance of the mind was upset
Implicit demand case examples
Miah (2003)
Miah (2003)
Video tapes containing child pornography, which allegedly had the victims finger prints on them
The important point is that a demand is made
Is it not necessary to prove that the demand was complied with in order to prove that the offence has taken place
Treacy v Dpp (1971)
Where a demand sent from England to Germany was held to originate in England and thus triable in English courts
With menaces
Thorne v Motors Traders Association (1937)
The word menace is to be liberally construed and not as limited to threats of violence but as including threats of any action detrimental to or unpleasant to the person addressed. It may also include a warning that in certain events such action is interested
Menaces should take its ordinary meaning
Lawerence
Lawrence
Menaces should take its ordinary meaning
Trivial threats are not sufficient
Harry
Harry
Trivial threats are not sufficient
Harry case
Local shop keepers stating they should pay or be subject to rag activities
Clear case
Whether an ordinary person might be influenced or made apprehensive so to act unwillingly to the demand
Garwood
- Where a normal person would have been threatened, but the victim was not. This they said would be blackmail
- Where the victim was threatened but the normal person would not have been.
This they said would be blackmail as long as the defendant was aware of the likely effect of his actions upon the victim
Mens rea of Blackmail
With a view to gain or a loss
Which is unwarranted
Gain and loss is defined under which act
Section 34 (2)(A) Theft Act 1968
Definition of gain and loss
Gain and loss are to be construed as extending only to gain or loss in money or other property, but as extending to any such gain or loss whether temporary or permanent
i ‘gain’ includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting what one has not
ii ‘loss’ includes a loss by not getting what one might get, as well as a loss by parting with what one has
Gain and loss case example
Bevans (1988)
Bevans (1988)
The defendant at gun point demanded that the doctor injured him with morphine
Value- still seen as money
Monetary value
Which is unwarranted
Two stage test
- Whether or not they think the demand is unwarranted
- If yes, whether it was made in the belief:
a. That there are reasonable grounds for making it
b. That the use of the menaces is a proper means of enforcing the demand
If the defendant knows that he is threatening to commit a crime, he cannot also claim that the demand is reasonable
Harvey
Harvey
Proper has a wide meaning l
Test for the jury
Did the accused actually believe that he was acting in a socially acceptable way
