Criminal Law Flashcards
Lloyd was a projectionist in a cinema. He borrowed films from the cinema, and with others, he copied them onto videotape, sold the videotapes, and then returned the original films to the cinema ready for the next show. Lloyd and his co-accused were convicted of conspiracy to steal (theft). Will they be liable?
No, where property is borrowed and returned, theft will only be established where the goodness, virtues and practical value of the property has been taken away.
The defendant had borrowed money from his employer’s safe, even though he knew this was against company rules. He said he intended to repay it on the following day after a debt had been repaid to him. Will he be liable for theft?
Yes, intending to return notes and coins of an equivalent value is not the same as intending to return the identical ones that were taken. Therefore, although such an intention may be relevant to the issue of dishonesty, it does not negative the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the original notes and coins.
The defendant handed a bank cashier a note which demanded that the cashier hand over money otherwise D would hurt the customer standing behind him. No force was used against the customer standing behind him, nor was the customer put in fear that he would be subjected then and there to force. In this case, neither could it be argued that the defendant sought to put the customer in fear that he would be subjected then and there to force because his threat against the customer was directed to the bank cashier.
There was no robbery, however, the defendant had committed an offence of blackmail.
What are the required elements for an offence under s 18 OAPA?
Wounding or causing GBH with intent
D broke into property unarmed, but then picked up a kitchen knife, stole property and inflicted GBH. What type of burglary is this?
This was aggravated burglary under s 9(1)(b) because he had a weapon when he committed the ulterior offences of theft and committing GBH.
K used a screwdriver to break into a house. When surprised by the householder, K told him to unplug the video and then stabbed the householder with the screwdriver. On leaving, K was arrested with a video in one hand and the screwdriver in the other.
This was aggravated burglary because the defendant had the weapon on them at the relevant time according to s9(1)(b) TA.
D shouted outside a caravan door to demand money from the occupant. V then ran out, where D beat him with a pole. D then discarded the pole and went inside and stole the money. What type of offence was this?
This was not aggravated burglary under either s 9(1)(a) or (b) as he did not enter the caravan with the pole and did not have it when he stole. This would have been
Prosecution counsel concedes that individual identifications of the defendant are of poor quality. However, prosecution counsel draws the judge’s attention to the fact that there are multiple identifications of the defendant by different witnesses and relies on this in arguing that the defence’s submission of no case to answer must fail.
Is prosecution counsel correct?
No- the prosecution counsel has conceded that the individual identifications are of poor quality
Hearsay can be admissible for which category of unavailable witnesses?
Which of the following is correct in relation to unfitness of a person to be a witness?
Unfitness relates to the ability of a witness to give evidence in court. There is no requirement that the condition which makes a person unfit is a medical condition.
When does the court have a discretion to exclude otherwise admissible hearsay?
If the statement’s reliability is doubtful
D is on trial for theft.
During D’s evidence they tell the jury that they are employed as a caretaker in a school and that comes with a high degree of trust
and responsibility and they ‘couldn’t do the job if they were not an honest person’.
D has convictions for theft and fraud.
What should the trial judge do regarding the prosecution’s application to adduce evidence of D’s bad character?
Allow the prosecution to adduce evidence of D’s bad character, to correct the false impression they have created by
suggesting they are honest and trustworthy.
The police are called to a supermarket where staff have witnessed a man shoplifting. He is arrested for theft and taken to the police station where his detention is authorised by the Custody Officer. The man’s solicitor arrives at the police station and he asks her how long he can be held in custody.
Which of the following most accurately explains how long the man can be held in custody?
You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station. You must be charged or released before that time.
A suspect was arrested on suspicion of murder (an indictable only offence). Before the 24 hour time limit on detention has expired, a superintendent properly authorised continued detention for a further 12 hours. However, the investigating officer still requires additional time to diligently and expeditiously complete enquiries.
Which of the following best explains the next step the investigating officer should take?
The investigating officer should apply to the magistrates’ court for a warrant of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in the first instance is an additional 36 hours.
A woman is arrested for fraud (an indictable offence). At the police station she is informed of her right to independent legal advice by the Custody Officer, and she asks for her usual solicitor to be contacted. She is put in a cell and later the Investigating Officer comes to speak with her. He says that they are delaying her access to legal advice because they have reasonable grounds to believe that information will be passed from the solicitor to other individuals who are suspected of committing fraud but not yet arrested.
Which of the following statements best describes whether the woman’s access to legal advice can be delayed?
Her access to a legal advice can be delayed indefinitely with written authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank
