Law-Robbery

Question 1

Where is the offence of robbery found?

Answer 1

Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968

Question 2

What does section 8 state?

Answer 2

A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force

Question 3

What is the actus reus for robbery?

Answer 3

The actus reus of theft (appropriation, property, belonging to another) and force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of force

Question 4

What are the two additional conditions on force?

Answer 4

It must be immediately before or during the theft and it must be in order to help you steal property

Question 5

What is the mens rea of robbery?

Answer 5

The mens rea of theft (dishonestly and intention to permanently deprive) and intention to use force

Question 6

What is completed theft?

Answer 6

For robbery, all elements of theft must be present, and if any single element is missing, there is no theft and no robbery

Question 7

What is an example of where the theft was not complete and so there was no robbery?

Answer 7

Robinson-defendant ran a clothing club and owed £7 by victims wife, defendant approached victim and threatened him. During struggle the man dropped £5 and defendant took it. Robbery conviction quashed as trial judge wrongly directed jury that D had to honestly believe in entitlement to money however as it was a genuine belief it was not dishonest (should have asked jury if belief was genuine)

Question 8

What is a case demonstrating where a robbery was committed?

Answer 8

Raphael and another where the defendants took victims car by force and demanded money for its return. Theft was complete (s6(1) made offer to return property subject to a condition which is inconsistent with victims rights to possession) therefore there was a robbery (where force is used to steal, then the moment the theft is complete, there is a robbery)

Question 9

What happened in Corcoran v Anderton?

Answer 9

Defendant hit woman in back and pulled at her bag, she let go and it fell on the ground and defendant ran off without it as woman was screaming. The theft was complete and defendants were guilty of robbery

Question 10

What case explains force or threat of force?

Answer 10

Dawson and James where a defendant pushed victim causing him to lose balance enabling other defendant to take his wallet. Convicted of robbery as court of appeal held that ‘force’ was an ordinary word so it was for the jury to decide if there had been force, so amount of force can be small

Question 11

What case supports Dawson and James?

Answer 11

Clouden where defendant wrenched a shopping basket from victims hands. Conviction upheld as trial judge was correct in directing that question of whether force had been used was for the jury to decide. (‘wrenched’=force but no force if bag is taken from lap or if it is pulled slightly so it slides off victims shoulder)

Question 12

What happened in P v DPP?

Answer 12

Defendant snatched a cigarette from victims hand without touching victim in any way. As there had been no direct contact between the victim and defendant it could not be said that force had been used ‘on a person’ therefore defendant not guilty of robbery (similar situation to pickpocketing where defendant is unaware of contact but if victim is pushed slightly to distract attention, it can be robbery)

Question 13

What is fear of force?

Answer 13

If force is used it may be robbery, but also fear of force may be sufficient for robbery even if force is not actually applied

Question 14

Why is robbery a conduct crime?

Answer 14

Robbery is also committed even if the victim is not actually frightened by the defendants actions or words

Question 15

What happened in B and R v DPP?

Answer 15

Victim (schoolboy aged 16) was stopped by 5 other school boys. They asked for his phone and money. As this was happening, another 5/6 boys joined and surrounded victim. No serious violence was used against victim, but he was pushed and his arms were held while he was searched, defendants then took his phone, £5, his watch and his travel card. Defendants appealed against robbery charge on the grounds that no force had been used and victim had not felt threatened

Question 16

What happened with the appeal for B and R v DPP?

Answer 16

Divisional court upheld their convictions for robbery on grounds that there was no need to show the victim felt threatened and there could be an implied threat of force(surrounding victim by many created implied threat), some limited force used by holding victims arms and pushing him

Question 17

What is the CPS charging standard?

Answer 17

Under use or threat of force, crown prosecution charging standards give examples of when it would be appropriate to charge robbery (when handbag or mobile phone is forcibly snatched from persons grasp, when 11 year olds hands over small amount of money following threats of significant violence made by older/physically larger youth, when no force used or threatened but weapon produced or made visible to the threat of victim)

Question 18

What examples does the CPS charging standards give on when it is not appropriate to charge robbery?

Answer 18

When bag has been taken from off shoulder of a victim without any force being used/threatened. Or when a shoulder strap is cut and victim is unaware of this until after bag is stolen

Question 19

What does ‘on any person’ mean?

Answer 19

The person threatened doesn’t have to be the person from whom the theft occurs, eg in an armed robbery, where customers are seized and threatened unless they are given money from bank (force on customer but theft on bank)

Question 20

What is the issue with ‘force immediately before or at the time of theft’?

Answer 20

How immediate does ‘immediately before’ have to be? There are no cases to clarify this. Also problem in deciding the point of which a theft is completed so that the force is not ‘at the time of stealing’

Question 21

What happened in the case of Hale?

Answer 21

Two defendants knocked on door of house. When woman opened door, they forced their way into the house. One defendant covered victims mouth while other went upstairs to see what he could take and took a jewellery box. The tied up victim before leaving

Question 22

What happened in the appeal for Hale?

Answer 22

Conviction upheld; jury could have come to the decision there was force immediately before the theft when one of the defendants put his hand over the victims mouth. In addition to the court of appeal thought that tying up the victim could also be force for the purpose of the robbery as they held that the theft was still ongoing

Question 23

What happened in the case of Lockley?

Answer 23

Defendant caught shoplifting cans of beer from an off-license and used force on shopkeeper who was trying to stop him escaping. Appealed on basis that theft was completed at the point that he used the force. Court of appeal followed the case and defendant was guilty

Question 24

What happened in the case of Vinall?

Answer 24

Defendants punched victim causing him to fall off bike. One defendant threatened victim who fled on foot chased by defendants. Defendants gave up chase and went back to bike then walked off with it. Abandoned it by bus shelter about 50 yards from where victim left it. Trial judge directed jury that intention to permanently deprive victim of bike could have been formed at point in time when bike was first taken or when abandoned as this would amount to a fresh appropriation. Jury convicted defendants of robbery

Question 25

What happened in the appeal for Vinall?

Answer 25

Court of appeal quashed conviction. It was unclear at which stage jury had decided that an intention to permanently deprive had taken place. If they had decided that leaving the bike at the bus shelter was when there was an intention to permanently deprive when there was not a robbery

Question 26

What is ‘force in order to steal’?

Answer 26

Force must be in order to steal so if not used for this purpose, any later theft will not become robbery-it would be two different offences of theft and assault, rather than robbery

Question 27

Explain the mens rea for robbery

Answer 27

The defendant must have the mens rea for theft i.e. dishonesty, intention to permanently deprive. Also must intend to use the force to steal