Criminal Damage Flashcards
What is the actus reus & mens rea of simple criminal damage (s1(1) CDA 1971)?
AR:
→ Destroy or damage
→ Property
→ Belonging to another
→ [Without lawful excuse ie. defence]
MR:
1. Intention or recklessness as to destroying or damaging such property
and
2. Knowledge or belief that the property belongs to another
Simple criminal damage: what will constitute damage / destruction?
Usually obvious on facts, can be temporary
Indications include:
- Expense/effort required to remedy damage
- Permanent or temporary impairment of value
- Permanent or temporary impairment of usefulness
What is ‘property’ under the Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Tangible property, including:
- Money
- Animals which are tamed / ordinarily kept in captivity / reduced into possession
Does not include plants growing wild on any land
What is property ‘belonging to another’ under the Criminal Damage Act 1971?
Legal owner + someone with custody or control of it + someone with any proprietary right or interest + someone with a charge on it (eg. mortgage)
property can belong to more than one person!
What is the mens rea of simple criminal damage?
Intention or recklessness + knowledge belongs to antoher
Intention:
1. D must intend to damage or destroy the property (or realises actions might result in such damage / destruction)
and
- D knows the property belongs to another (or realises it might)
Recklessness
1. D is aware of the risk that actions might result in such damage / destruction
and
- The risk of damage was objectively unreasonable one to take
and
- D knows the property belongs to another (or realises it might)
Simple criminal damage: what are the 2 defences that come under ‘without lawful excuse’
(a) Belief ‘owner’ consented or would have consented had he known
- Must be honest belief that the person they believe entitled to consent had done or would have
- Will still count if it was belief due to intoxication
(b) Belief damage was necessary to protect other property belonging to D or another
- Purpose to protect property belonging to D or another (obj)
- Belief that in immediate need of protection (subj)
- Belief that means used were reasonable (subj)
- Act capable of protecting property (obj)
What are the possible defences for simple criminal damage?
→ ‘Without lawful excuse’: belief ‘owner’ consented or would have consented
→ ‘Without lawful excuse’: belief necessary to protect other property
→ Self-def
→ Intoxication
What is the AR & MR of aggravated criminal damage (s1(2) CDA)?
AR:
→ Damage or destruction
→ Of property (doesn’t need to belong to another!)
MR:
1 - Intention or recklessness as to the damage / destruction of property
2 - Intention or recklessness as to the endangerment of life by the damage or destruction
What is the mens rea of aggravated criminal damage?
1 - Intention or recklessness as to the damage / destruction of property
and
2 - Intention or recklessness as to the endangerment of life by the damage or destruction
- Danger of life must arise from the damage caused (eg. broken glass) not the cause of the damage (firing bullets)
Can a defendant rely on the without lawful excuse defences for aggravated criminal damage?
No - general defences only
What is the actus reus & mens rea of arson?
Same as simple criminal damage - just must be caused by fire, ie.
AR:
→ Destroy or damage by fire
→ Property
→ Belonging to another
→ [Without lawful excuse ie. defence]
MR:
1. Intention or recklessness as to destroying or damaging such property
and
2. Knowledge or belief that the property belongs to another
What is the actus reus & mens rea of aggravated arson?
Same as aggravated criminal damage, with added requirement that caused by fire, ie.
AR:
→ Damage or destruction by fire
→ Of property (doesn’t need to belong to another!)
MR:
1 - Intention or recklessness as to the damage / destruction of property
2 - Intention or recklessness as to the endangerment of life by the damage or destruction
