Robbery Flashcards
Robbery—Theft Act 1968, s. 8
- Triable on indictment
- Life imprisonment
The Theft Act 1968, s. 8 states:
(1)
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.
Robbery Example
A man enters a betting shop and approaches the cashier. Without saying a word, he passes a note to the cashier that simply says, ‘Look to your left’. The cashier looks and sees the man’s accomplice standing several feet away and pointing a knife at the back of one of the shop’s customers. The customer is oblivious to the actions of the man’s accomplice. The man passes a second note to the cashier that says, ‘Give me the money in the till or else he gets it!’ The cashier, fearing for the customer, hands over the contents of the betting shop till. This is not robbery as the cashier cannot fear force for the betting shop customer. However, whilst there is no robbery there would be an offence of blackmail (Theft Act 1968, s. 21).
Let us say that instead of handing the contents of the betting shop till over to the offender, the cashier shakes her head and refuses to hand over any money. At this point, the man signals to his accomplice who shouts at the customer ‘Look here!’ The customer turns around and can clearly see the knife in the hand of the accomplice pointing towards him and fears force for himself. The man speaking to the cashier repeats his demand and the cashier hands over the contents of the betting shop till. This is a robbery as the customer fears force for himself.
In a final variation of this example, let us once again say that instead of handing the contents of the betting shop till over to the offender after the note demanding money is passed to her, the cashier shakes her head and refuses to hand over any money. At this point, the man signals to his accomplice who pulls the customer’s head backwards and drags the knife across the side of the customer’s throat causing a small cut. The customer screams in terror and at this point the cashier concedes to the man’s demand and hands over the till contents. At this point in time, a robbery is committed as force is actually being used (albeit on a third party).
The Theft Element of the Offence
For there to be a robbery, there must be a theft; so if there is no theft, then there can be no robbery. The word ‘steal’ in the offence relates to the offence under s. 1 of the Theft Act 1968 and, therefore, if any element of theft cannot be proved, the offence of robbery will not be made out. For example, in R v Robinson [1977] Crim LR 173, D, who was owed £7 by P’s wife, approached P, brandishing a knife. A fight followed, during which P dropped a £5 note. D picked it up and demanded the remaining £2 owed to him. Allowing D’s appeal against a conviction for robbery, the Court of Appeal held that the prosecution had to prove that D was guilty of theft, and that he would not be (under the Theft Act 1968, s. 2(1)(a)) if he believed that he had a right in law to deprive P of the money, even though he knew that he was not entitled to use the knife to get it, i.e. there was no dishonesty (but see chapter 3.3 for blackmail).
The Robbery Time Frame
Section 8(1) requires that the force must be used or the threat made ‘immediately before or at the time’ of the theft. There is no guidance as to what ‘immediately before’ means. Clearly, if the force used or threatened is after the offence of theft has taken place, there will be no robbery; however, theft can be a continuing offence. This was decided in R v Hale (1979) 68 Cr App Rep 415, where the Court of Appeal stated that appropriation is a continuing act and whether it has finished or not is a matter for the jury to decide. From the robbery perspective, Hale decides that where D had assumed ownership of goods in a house, the ‘time’ of stealing is a continuing process. It does not end as soon as the property is picked up by the defendant and can be a continuing act so long as he/she is in the course of removing it from the premises. So, if D uses or threatens force to get away with the property (while still in the house, for example), a robbery is committed. This would not be the case if the defendant used force outside the house as there must come a time when the appropriation ends. The issue may be resolved by asking the question, ‘Was D still on the job?’ (R v Atakpu [1994] QB 69).
In Order to Do So
The use or threat of force must be ‘in order’ to carry out the theft. Force used in any other context means the offence is not committed, for example:
- Two men are fighting outside a pub. One man punches the other in the face and the force of the blow knocks the man out. As the injured man falls to the floor, his wallet drops out of his jacket pocket and onto the pavement. His opponent decides that he will steal the wallet. No robbery is committed in these circumstances because the force is used for a purpose other than to steal.
The question to ask in such circumstances is ‘Why has the force been used and/or threatened?’ If the answer is anything other than ‘to enable the defendant to commit theft’, then there is no offence of robbery.
Force
A small amount of force used in order to accomplish a theft may change that theft into a robbery. For example, in R v Dawson (1977) 64 Cr App R 170 the defendant and two others surrounded their victim. One of the attackers ‘nudged’ the victim and, while he was unbalanced, another stole his wallet. In Dawson, the court declined to define ‘force’ any further than to say that juries would understand it readily enough. In line with general principles of actus reus (criminal conduct), the force used by the defendant must be used voluntarily. Therefore, the accidental use of force such as when a pickpocket, in the process of stealing a wallet from his victim on a train, is pushed into his victim by the train jolting on the railway line would not be a robbery.
On Any Person
The force used to accomplish a robbery need not be used against the owner or possessor of the property. For example, a gang of armed criminals use force against a security guard in order to overpower him and steal cash from the bank he is standing outside and guarding.
Use of Force on Property
Force does not actually have to be used ‘on’ the person, i.e. on the actual body of the victim. It may be used indirectly, for example on something that the victim is carrying and thereby transferring the force to the person. This was the case in R v Clouden [1987] Crim LR 65, where the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a conviction for robbery when the defendant had wrenched the victim’s shopping basket from her hand and ran off with it. However, in P v DPP [2012] EWHC 1657 (Admin), it was held that snatching a cigarette from the hand of the victim was incapable of amounting to robbery. Mitting J stated that ‘It cannot be said that the minimum use of force required to remove a cigarette from between the fingers suffices to amount to the use of force against that person’. In this case, there was no evidence of direct physical contact between the victim and the thief.
The Fear of Force
Where only the threat of force is involved, the intention must be to put a person in fear for him/herself; an intention to put someone in fear for another is not enough (R v Taylor [1996] 10 Archbold News 2). This may seem at odds with the approach to the actual use of force in the offence of robbery (in that force can be used against a third party who is unconnected with the property subject to the theft).
General Points
Any threats to use force at some time in the future (even by a matter of minutes) would constitute an offence of blackmail. Threats to use force at some place other than the location of the offence fall into the same category. This effectively excludes threats made via the telephone in all but the most improbable of situations.
