Must Know Flashcards
Four beliefs for Claim of Right
- A belief in a proprietary or possessory right in property.
- The belief must be about rights to the property in relation to which the offence has been committed.
- The belief must be held at the time of the conduct..
- The belief must be held by the defendant but does not have to be reasonable and may be based on ignorance or mistake.
What is required to be proven for Deception
- That there was an intent to deceive
- That there was a representation by the defendant
- That the representation was false and that the defendant either knew it to be false in material particular OR was reckless whether it was false in material particular
A false representation can be communicated by either:
- Orally (Claiming to own goods that are actually subject to hire purchase)
- By Conduct ( Representing oneself to be a collector for charity)
- Documentary (Presenting a valueless cheque)
Distinction between theft and obtains by deception
The difference lies with the concepts of possession and title or ownership. If someone has gained something by deception then the owner has given them ownership of the thing freely although under deception. If something has been stolen it has been taken without permission therefore the thief has possession but not title or ownership.
What is necessary to avoid title
- Communicate with the buyer
- Take all other possible steps to bring it to the buyers notice, e.g by writing a letter, text, phone call etc
- Advise the police
Section 246(4) - Receiving after restoration to owner
The effect of this section is that a person who in certain circumstances may be a receiver, cannot be convicted of receiving from a fraudulent offender who has a voidable title to goods dishonestly obtained by means of a deception .
When is someone entitled to a good title?
If an innocent purchaser buys goods obtained by a deception before title has been avoided then he or she is entitled to a good title.
Under Section 256, Forgery, such alterations might involve:
- Additions
- Insertions
- Deletions
- Obliteration
- Erasures
- removal of material or otherwise
Specified intent for Forgery
The prosecution must prove that at the time of the alleged act, the defendant knowing that the document was false, had intended either:
- To use the false document to obtain or
- That the false document be used or acted on as genuine
Knowledge required for Using Forged Documents
You must prove that the defendant knew the document was a forgery at the time of the physical act of using, dealing with or acting upon it.
To prove that the document is forgery you must prove that:
- The document was false.
- The user knew that the document had been made with the knowledge and intent required under section 256 of the Crimes Act 1961.
Forgery vs Altering etc
In the offence of altering etc you must prove that the offender intended to obtain by deception.
In a charge of forgery the document must be a false document.
With forgery an intent to deceive only is required not an intent to obtain by deception.
Distinction between Section 250(1) & 250(2) - Damaging or interfering with computer system
(1) - Criminalises the destruction, damaging or altering of a computer system that the defendant knows or ought to know would endanger life
(2) - Makes it an offence to damage etc any computer system and adds the requirement that the defendant must act without authority with the knowledge that they are not authorised or are reckless whether they are authorised.
(2) (b) - Is directed at instances where the defendant has so arranged matters that the victims own operation of his or her computer system, or the acts of third parties will cause damage to the victims computer system.
A False Document includes a document of which the whole or any material part purports to be made by who?
- Any person who did not make it
- By a fictitious person
Propensity evidence may be relevant in some deception cases. When may evidence of propensity be called in cases of deception?
Propensity evidence, whether on previous or later occasions to the offence charged is admissible in cases of deception where there is a sufficiently strong connection between the offences.
