Goods In Custody Flashcards
What are the proofs of Goods in Custody?
The Accused:
- Knowingly
- Had a thing
- In his/her custody or in the custody of another; or in premises; or gave custody to a person who was not lawfully entitled to possession of the thing; and
- Which may be reasonably suspected of being stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained
Under what section of the Crimes Act is the offence of Goods in Custody found?
Section 527C
For a Goods in Custody offence, does “premise” include “vehicle“ (in S527 subsection (c))?
Yes. Premises includes vehicle
Where did the offence of Goods in Custody arise from?
The purpose of Section 527C arose as a means to provide police with the ability to charge someone who has possession of goods which are suspected of being stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained, but lack the proof for a charge of larceny or receiving.
Goods in custody “may be reasonably suspected”
All that is required is a reasonable suspicion (attached to the goods not the person) - does not require proof that the goods were in fact stolen/unlawfully obtained - objective test only. A reasonable suspicion based on facts which would create a reasonable suspicion in the mind of a reasonable man.
Section 527C (1A) is an amendment to include giving of custody of a motor vehicle to a person (including motor vehicle parts). What is the Statute of Limitations for this subsection?
Statute of Limitations when it involves a vehicle (S527(1A)) is 2 years after the date of the commission of the offence.
What is the statutory defence for Goods in Custody and when can it be used? Cite legislation.
The statutory defence for Goods in Custody is found at Section 527C(2). It can be used ONLY after the prosecution has established prima facie. The defence is: It is a sufficient defence to a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1) if the defendant satisfies the court that he or she had NO reasonable grounds for suspecting that the thing referred to in the charge was stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained.
What are the four different (separate and discrete) subsections relating to GIC?
Section 527C. Any person who:
- Has any thing in his or her custody
- Has any thing in the custody of another person
- Has any thing in or on premises (whether belonging to or occupied by himself or herself or not) or whether that thing is there for his or her own use or the use of another, or
- Gives custody of any thing to a person who is not lawfully entitled to possession of the thing, which thing may be reasonably suspected of being stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained
is liable for conviction.
What are the penalties for Goods in Custody?
If the thing is a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part, or a vessel or a vessel part - 1 year imprisonment or 10 penalty units or both.
In the case of any other thing - 6 months imprisonment or 5 penalty units or both.
Does a statute of limitations apply in relation to Goods in Custody and what is it?
Yes. Section 179 of the Criminal Procedure Act states that there is a 6 month statute of limitations for Summary offences - unless an Act provides otherwise.
Beware of subsection (d) as the offence occurs at the time of giving custody to the other person
Section 527C (1A) does provide otherwise - giving custody of a motor vehicle to a person who is not lawfully entitled to possession - car rebirthing - 2 year statute of limitations.
What is the statutory defence for Goods in Custody? And where is it found?
The statutory defence for GIC is found at Section 527C (2). It states at 527C (2) that it is a sufficient defence if the defendant satisfies the court that he or she had no reasonable grounds for suspecting that the thing referred to in the charge was stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained. (Subjective test).
What are the proofs for Goods in Custody?
- The Accused
- Knowingly
- Had a thing
- In his/her:
- custody
- in the custody of another
- in or on premises, or
- gave the custody to another who is not lawfully entitled to possession of the thing, and
Which thing may reasonably be suspected of being stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained.
What did R v English find in relation to the Magistrate’s role when it comes to Goods in Custody charges?
It was found in R v English that the Magistrate or Court must hold reasonable suspicion at the time of the hearing:
“It must be determined not according to the subjective beliefs of the police at the time but according to an objective criterion determined by the court before whom the Accused stands charged”. - R v English.
What did Morris v Russell find in relation to Goods in Custody?
Morris v Russell found that the Magistrate must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that it is proper to entertain a reasonable suspicion that the goods were stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained not that they were in fact stolen.
What needs to be proved regarding “Knowledge”
In relation to “knowledge” all that needs to be proved is knowledge of the existence of the goods - not knowledge that the goods were stolen or unlawfully obtained.
It is a subjective test - can be established by admissions “it’s not mine”, conversations, and other circumstantial inferences such as attempt to dispose of