Robbery

Question 1

What is the section for Robbery?

Answer 1

Section 234(1) Crimes Act 1961.

Question 2

What are the elements for Robbery?

Answer 2

• Theft
• accompanied by violence
• or*
• accompained by threats of violence
• to any person or property
• used to extort the property stolen ,
• or*
• to prevent or overcome resistance to its being stolen

Question 3

In regards to theft, Section 219(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961, explains what?

Answer 3

Dishonestly, and without claim of right takes property with intent to deprive the owner permanently of that property.

Question 4

in relation to Theft, Section 219 Crimes Act 1961, states…

Answer 4

Dishonestly, in relation to an act or omission, means done or omitted without belief that there was express or implied consent to, or authority for, the act or omission from a person entitled to give such consent or authority.

Question 5

Section 219 Crimes act 1961, in regards to ‘takes’ explains what under subsection (2) and (3)…

Answer 5

Section 219 Crimes Act 1961:

(3) In this section, taking does not include obtaining ownership or possession of, or control over, any property with the consent of the person from whom it is obtained, whether or not consent is obtained by deception.
(4) For tangiable property, theft is committed by a taking when the offender moves the property or causes it to be moved.

Question 6

R V LAIPER

In relation to robbery…

Answer 6

Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary.

Question 7

R V SKIVINGTON

(defence of robbery)

Answer 7

Defence to theft (claim of right) is a defence to robbery.

Question 8

R V PEAT

(Robbery)

Answer 8

The immediate return of goods by the robber does not purge the offence.

Question 9

CASE LAW:

R V MAIHI

Answer 9

“It is implicit in ‘accompany’ that there must be a nexus (connection or link) between the act of stealing….and a threat of violence. both must be present.”

However the term “does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous…”

Question 10

VIOLENCE

PENEHA V POLICE

Answer 10

it is sufficent that “the actions of the defendant forcibly interfere with personal freedom or amount to forcible powerful or violenct action or motion producing a very marked or powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort.”

Question 11

THREAT OF VIOLENCE

R V BROUGHTON

Answer 11

A threat of violence is “the manifestation of an intention to inflict violence unless the money of property handed over. The threat may be direct or veiled. It may be conveyed by words or conduct, or a combonation of both.”

Question 12

THREAT OF VIOLENCE

R V PACHOLKO

Answer 12

The actual presence or absense of fear on the part of the complainant is not the yardstick. It is the conduct of the accused which has to be assessed rather than ‘the strength of the nervous of the person threatened.’

Question 13

What is the meaning of extort?

Answer 13

To “exort” means to obtain by coercion or intimidation.

If the threats have not in fact affected the will of the victim, there is no robbery.

Question 14

What is the section and act of Aggravated Robbery?

Answer 14

Section 235(a) Crimes Act 1961.

Question 15

What are the elements of Aggravated Robbery?

Answer 15

• robs
• any person
• at the time of, or, immediately before, or, immediately after, the robbery, causes GBH
• to any person

Question 16

When comparing Aggravated Robbery and Robbery, what is the difference the begining elements, between robs (agg rob) and theft (robbery)?

Answer 16

In aggravated robbery the element, robs:

Robbery - Section 234 Crimes Act 1961- theft accompanied by violence, to any person or property, used to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistance to its being stolen.

in robbery the element, theft:

Theft - Section 219(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961 - Dishonestly without claim of right takes any property with intent to deprive the owner permanently of that property.

Question 17

In relation to Aggravated Robbery, does GBH to a person have to be the victim that was robbed?

Answer 17

No, the person suffering the GBH, need not be the person robbed.

Question 18

R V WELLS

(agg rob)

Answer 18

There is no requirement that the harm be inflicted on the victim of the robbery, thus infliction of harm to a person seeking to prevent the escape of the offender would come under this section.

Question 19

What section would you charge someone for an aggravated robbery with more than one offender?

What are the elements?

Answer 19

Section 235(b) Crimes Act 1961

• Being together with any other person or persons
• robs
• any person

Question 20

What is meant in the term “together with”?

Answer 20

The term ‘together with’ requires that two or more people are actually present and acting together in the commission of the robbery.

Question 21

R V ROYCE

Answer 21

“The crown must establish at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred”.

Question 22

R V GALEY

Answer 22

“Being together” in the contect of section 235(b) involves “two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force, either in any event or as the circumstances might require, directly in the perpetration of the crime.”

Question 23

Explain section 234 Crimes Act 1961 in relation to the definition of ‘robs’…

Answer 23

Theft accompanied by violence or threats of violence, to any person or property, used to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistence to its being stolen.

Question 24

What is the difference between sections:

235(a)

235(b)

235(c)

(AGGRAVATED ROBBERY)

Answer 24

235(a) - Single offender, no weapon

235(b) - Together with - more than one offender

235(c) - Single offender with an offensive weapon / appear to be an offensive weapon

Question 25

What are the elements to aggravated robbery with a weapon?

Section 235(c) Crimes Act 1961

Answer 25

• Being armed with any
• offensive weapon or instrument
• or*
• anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument
• robs
• any person

Question 26

Explain an offensive weapon as stated in:

Section 202A Crimes Act 1961…

Answer 26

(1) Offensive weapon means any article made or altered for use for causing bodily injury, or intended by the person having it with him for such use.
(2) Offensive weapon means any article capable of being used for causing bodily injury

Question 27

R V BENTHAM

Answer 27

“What is possessed must under the definition be a thing. A person’s hand or finger are not a thing.”

(Example: Finger gun during aggravated robbery…)

Question 28

What is the section for assault with intent to rob?

Answer 28

Section 236(1)(a) Crimes Act 1961

Question 29

What are the elements for Assault with the intent to rob?

Answer 29

• With intent to rob any person
• causes GBH
• to that person or any other person

Question 30

What is section 236(1)(b) Crimes Act 1961?

Answer 30

• With intent to rob any person
• being armed with
• any offensive weapon or instrument,

or

• anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument
• assaults that person or any other person

Question 31

What is section 236(1)(c) Crimes Act 1961?

Answer 31

Assault with intent to rob (Together with)

• with intent to rob any person
• being together with any other person or persons
• assaults that person or any other person

Question 32

What are the elements for:

Section 236(2) Assault with intent to rob?

Answer 32

• Assaults
• any person
• with intent to rob that person or any other person

Question 33

What are the three case law examples in relation to Robbery, specifically explaining the element Theft?

Answer 33

**R v Skivington: Claim of Right is a defence to robbery

R v Lapier: Robbery is complete at the time property is taken, even if momentary.

R V Peat: Return does not negate the offence.**

Question 34

When explaining the element theft and ‘claim of right’ what section could you refer to?

Answer 34

Claim of right: s2 CA1961 a belief in possessory right of the property.

Question 35

In relation to case law in explaining Robbery and the elements:

-Accompanied by violence

or

-threats of violence

What case law could you refer to?

Answer 35

Accompanied by Violence:
R v Maihi: There must be a connection between the act of stealing and threat of violence. Both must be present; however, the term does not require that the act of stealing and threat by made contemporaneously.

R v Mitchell – previously made threats on the victim’s mind, assessed by fact and degree in each case.

Peneha v Police – sufficient that the defendants acts forcibly interfere with the personal freedom, or a forcible powerful or violent action or motion

Threats of Violence:
R V Broughton – Threat may be direct or veiled, conveyed by conduct or words or both. Absence of fear by the victim does not negate the threat.

Question 36

How would you explain ‘extort’?

Answer 36

to obtain by coercion or intimidation.

Question 37

What three case law examples would you refer to in relation to

-Robs?

Answer 37

R v Lapier: Robbery is complete at the time property is taken, even if momentary

R v Skivington: Claim of Right is a defence to robbery

R v Maihi: There must be a connection between the act of stealing and threat of violence. Both must be present; however, the term does not require that the act of stealing and threat by made contemporaneously.

Question 38

When discussing Aggravated Robbery, Section 235(a) Crimes Act 1961.

When explaing GBH.

What case law could you refer to?

Answer 38

DPP v Smith – bodily harm means harm that is really serious.

Question 39

What two case law examples would you use in Robbery when explaining the element:

Being together with any other person?

Answer 39

R V Joyce – must establish at least two people physically present at the time.

R V Galey – Being together means two or more person having the common intention to use their combined force.

Question 40

When explaining - Robs as an element of Robbery, what may you refer to about theft (what section of the crimes act…)

Answer 40

Theft – as per S219 of the Crimes Act “dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property.

Question 41

In relation to a scenario which a concealed weapon, as the belief of the victim, turns out to be the offenders hand hidden, instead of an offensive weapon.

What case law could you refer to?

Answer 41

R V Bentham, – A person’s hands or fingers are not a thing.

Question 42

When explaining the element of an offensive weapon,

what section of the crimes act and definition could you provide?

Answer 42

Offensive Weapon S202A - any article capable of being used for causing bodily injury