Criminal Damage Flashcards
What is Section 1(1) - Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Criminal Damage (Basic Offence)
What is Section 1 (2) - Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Aggravated Criminal Damage
What is Section 1(3) - Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Arson & Aggravated Arson
What is Section 2 - Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Threats to Destroy or Damage Property
What is Section 3 - Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Having Articles with Intent to Destroy or Damage Property
What are the points to prove for Section 1(1) Criminal Damage
- Without lawful excuse
- Destroy/Damage
- Property to value of
- Intending to
- Destroy/Damage such property or
- Being reckless whether it was destroyed/damaged
Does the damage need to be permanent?
No, here is no need for the damage to be permanent, it can be temporary
What is one of the definitions of what damage is?
To make something less useful than it was
When can property be regarded as ‘destroyed’?
If it has been rendered ‘useless’
What is subjectively recklessness?
Knowing the risk but nevertheless takes the risk
What types of offence is Criminal Damage under Section 1(1)?
Triable either way – if the value of the property damaged is less than £5000 – the offence will be tried SUMMARILY in Magistrate’s Court
What is Section 30(1) - Crime & Disorder Act 1998?
Racially or Religiously Aggravated Criminal Damage
What are the 7 points to prove for Aggravated Criminal Damage?
- Without lawful excuse
- Destroy/Damage
- Property
- Whether belonging to self or another
- With intent to destroy/damage or recklessly destroy/damage
- Intending by destruction/damage to endanger life of another or
- Being reckless as to whether such life would thereby be endangered
What are the 5 points to prove for Arson?
- Without lawful excuse
- Destroy/Damage
- By fire
- Property with intent to destroy/damage
- Being reckless whether such property was destroyed/damaged
What is aggravated arson?
Arson, but with the intent to endanger life or being reckless as to whether such life would be endangered.
What are the 4 points to prove for threats to destroy or damage property?
- Without lawful excuse
- Threatened to destroy/damage property of a person
- Intending
- A person would fear that the threat would be carried out
For the aggravated criminal damage offence under Section 1(2), does the property have to ‘belong to another’?
No
In relation to Section 1(2) of the Act who may have ‘lawful excuse’?
Section 1(2) involves the danger to life and there cannot be any lawful excuse for destroying or damaging property when life may be endangered.
Evidentially, how are you going to prove someone’s ‘intent’?
Admission by defendant, circumstances of the offence, witnesses, defendant’s actions, threats made, proving the defendant’s state of mind at the time of committing the offence is important
In relation to Section 1(2) of the Act does a person have to be ‘harmed’…why?
No, no injury is actually required; the defendant must intend or be subjectively reckless as to the damage being caused and the risk of endangering the life of another.
Subjectively reckless requires 2 parts, in simple terms, what are they?
1) They knew there was a risk.
2) They took the risk anyway.
In relation to Section 2 of the Act (threats to cause damage) whose ‘intention’ matters?
The prosecution must show that the suspect intended that the other person feared that the threat would be carried out.
How can ‘threats’ be made?
- Verbally
- Written
- Text
- Letter
Does the damage need to be permanent?
No, it can be temporary. Street artists using chalk on pavements. Tyres being let down.
Do threats have to be directed at the victim?
No, they can be directed at a third person.
‘Belonging to another’ means more than just the owner who generally has ‘custody or control’ of it. Name 2 other possible owners in law?
1) Someone who has a ‘proprietary right or interest’ in it or
2) A ‘charge’ on it.
In relation to Section 3 of the Act (articles) what is meant by ‘anything’?
Name 5 things
- Explosives
- Hammer
- Brick
- Knife
- Spray can
- Paint
Does the offender have to have the ‘article’ in their physical possession?
No – can also be custody or control – you must prove that the suspect intended to use the item or allow another to use the item to cause damage to property.
There are 4 offences under Sec 1 collectively. Simple Criminal Damage, aggravated damage, arson and aggravated arson. Which ones, if any, are ‘indictable only’?
Aggravated damage and aggravated arson.
There are 2 specific defences in addition to the General Defences, what are they? Which offences do they NOT apply to?
Consent and Protection
Sec 1(2) aggravated damage endangering life, Sec 1(3) arson endangering life, Sec 2 threats endangering life, Sec 3 having articles endangering life
Scenario: There have been numerous problems between John and his neighbour Sally. He tells her that if she parks her car outside his house again, he will slash its tyres. John has no intention of carrying out this threat. Sally, however, is frightened by what he says
Q: On these facts alone, has John completed the offence or is there something else the prosecution would need to prove?
The offence is not yet complete; the prosecution would still need to prove that he intended her to fear that the damage would be carried out. Her fear is good evidentially but it’s not the point that needs proving
Scenario: Taylor owns a property which has recently been taken over by squatters. One afternoon he goes to the property with a petrol can and a lighter. He sets the property alight but made no attempt to see if they were there. Fortunately, the squatters had gone out for the day
Q: Have any offences been committed under the 1971 Act?
On the way there he is in possession of articles for use for causing damage, Sec 3.
He also commits an aggravated offence under Sec 1(3). The circumstances point to him having strong reasons to believe that the squatters may be in the house and if he sets fire to it without first checking that it is safe to do so, he commits the offence of aggravated arson by being reckless as to whether or not another’s life would be endangered. The offence is complete even though the squatters had gone out and no-one could have actually been harmed
Scenario: Samantha has just found out her partner has been cheating on her. Armed with an air rifle she goes to her partner’s house where she can see him standing by the window in his living room. She fires the rifle which smashes the window; the bullet alone continues and hits her intended victim on the arm causing injury
Q: In relation to Criminal damage, further offences, have any offences (apart from firearms offences) been committed…if so which one(s) and why?
Samantha has committed an offence under Section 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 and an assault. It is the bullet that has caused the injury and not the glass from the broken window
Scenario: James has been out all night and is drunk. Whilst walking on his way home he sees his ex-girlfriend’s car parked up outside her house. James picks up a brick intending to smash the windscreen but before he could he is stopped by the police
Q: Have any offences been committed…if so which one and why?
James commits the offence of having anything (a brick) in his custody or control with intent, without lawful excuse, to use it to destroy/damage property belonging to another – Section 3 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971
If someone damages their own property, if the damage turns out to be minor will they still be charged for aggravated criminal damage?
The outcome of the damage is not relevant if they intended or were reckless to endanger someone’s else’s life
