Robbery

Question 1

Robbery
Section 234, Crimes Act 1961
10 year imprisonment max

Answer 1

Robbery is theft accompanied by violence or threats of violence to any person or property used to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistance to it’s being stolen.

Question 2

Theft

Section 219, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 2

a. Dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property
b. Dishonestly and without claim of right, using or dealing with any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property after obtaining possession of, or control over the property in whatever manner.

Question 3

Dishonestly

Section 217, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 3

Dishonestly in relation to an act or omission, means done or omitted without a 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 4

Claim of Right

Section 2, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 4

A belief at the time of the act in a proprietary or possessory right in property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed, although that belief may be based on ignorance or mistake of fact or of any matter of law other the the enactment against which the offence is alleged to have been committed.

Question 5

R V Skivington (1967)

Answer 5

Larceny (or theft) is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has claim of right is a defence to larceny, then it negatives one of the elements in the offence of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out.

Question 6

R V Lapier (1784)

Answer 6

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

Question 7

Define “taking”

Answer 7

Property is taken the moment the item is moved with intent to steal it.

Question 8

Proof of “possession”

Answer 8

Proof of possession requires proof of both a physical element and mental element.

1. Physical element - custody or control over the item. It can be actual or potential possession.
2. Mental element - combination of both knowledge that the person possesses the item and an intention to possess the item

Question 9

Actual possession vs potential possession

Answer 9

Actual possession - arises where the thing in question is in a person’s physical custody or control.

Potential possession - arises when the person has the potential to have the thing in question. E.g. stores the item at an assoiate’s house.

Question 10

Define “control”

Answer 10

To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over something.

A person can control an item that is not in their physical all custody, and conversely can have something in their physical custody that they have no control over.

Question 11

Define “property”

Section 2, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 11

Property includes real and personal property, and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, (money, electricity) and any debt, and anything in action, and any other right of interest.

This also includes intangible property. E.g. funds in a bank account or megabytes of data on an internet account.

Question 12

Intent to deprive owner permanently

Section 2, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 12

An intent to deal with property in such a manner that:

a. the property cannot be returned to any owner in the same condition, or
b. Any owner is likely to be permanently deprived of the property or of any interest in the property.

Question 13

What is” intent”?

Answer 13

In criminal law context there are 2 specific types of intention in an offence.

• intention to commit the act
• an intention to get a specific result

Question 14

Define “deliberate act”

Answer 14

The act or omission must be more than involuntary or accidental.

Question 15

Explain “intent to produce a result”

Answer 15

In the context of robbery, “result” means “aim, object or purpose”

Question 16

Circumstantial evidence from which an offender’s intent may be inferred in proving intent.

Answer 16

The onus is generally on the prosecution to prove an defender’s intent beyond reasonable doubt.

Consider:

• the offenders actions before, during and after
• the surrounding circumstances
• the nature of the act itself

Question 17

To deprive the owner permanently of property

Answer 17

The thief must desire, or foresee as virtually certain, that the owner will never regain the property.

It is not necessary that they intend to keep it. They could destroy it or give it away.

An intent to replace it with a similar item does not negate an intention to deprive any owner permanently of the original items stolen. It may negate dishonesty.

Question 18

Ownership

Section 218, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 18

A person is to be regarded as the owner of any property that is stolen if, at the time of the theft, that person has:

a. Possession or control of the property, or
b. Any interest in the property, or
c. The right to take possession or control of the property.

Question 19

R V Maihi (1993)

Answer 19

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.

In this case law the accessed did not commit a theft of taking. There was evidence of theft by conversion accompanied by a threat of violence satisfying the requirements of s234.

Question 20

Define “accompanied by violence”

Answer 20

The violence or threats will usually occur at, or immediately before, the time of the theft, however there may be situations where this is not the case.
E.g. R v Maihi

Question 21

Define “violence”

Answer 21

In the context of robbery, violence must involve more than a minimal degree of force and more than a technical assault, but need not involve the infliction of bodily harm.

Question 22

Peneha v Police

Answer 22

It is sufficient that “the actions of the defendant forcibly interfere with personal freedom or amount to forcible powerful or violent action or motion producing. A very marked or powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort.

Question 23

Define “threat”

Answer 23

A threat is generally a direct or veiled warning that violence will be used if the victim does not submit to the robber’s demands.

Threats may also be conveyed by inference through the defendant’s conduct, demeanour or even appearance, depending on the circumstances.

Question 24

R V Broughton (1986)

Answer 24

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

Question 25

Considerations made in circumstances to prove “threats”

Answer 25

A sufficient implied threat may be inferred from “inherently violent” circumstances where the victim is in a vulnerable position.

Considerations:

• The relative ages of the parties
• their respective to be physiques
• their appearance
• their demeanour
• what was said and done by those involved
• the manner and setting in which the incident took place

Question 26

Proving “threats of violence”

Answer 26

It is the conduct of the defendant that is relevant, rather than the presence or absence of fear in the victim, however the effect on the victim may be relevant to determining whether or not the defendant’s conduct was threatening.

It is the conduct of the accused which has to be assessed rather than the strength of the nerves of the person threatened.

Question 27

Explain “Any person” in s234

Answer 27

The age of the victim is not relevant.

The threat of violence may be directed against any person and need not be against the victim or the victim’s property.

Question 28

The prosecution must prove that the purpose of the purpose of the violence or threats of violence was to extort the property stolen or to prevent or overcome resistance to its being stolen.

Answer 28

It is not sufficient that the offender simply used violence or threats if such use was for some collateral purpose.

Question 29

Explain “extort”

Answer 29

To obtain by coercion or intimidation.

The prosecution must show that the threats induced the victim to part with their property.

It is the conduct of the defendant rather than the nerves of the victim that must be assessed.

The effect on the mind of the victim is relevant to whether the threats induced the victim to part with their property.

Question 30

Define “prevent”

Answer 30

To keep from happening.

This provision applies when the offender anticipates resistance from the victim, and uses violence or threats to ensure it does not commence.

Question 31

Define “overcome”

Answer 31

To defeat, to prevail over, to get the better of in a conflict.

This provision will therefore apply when the victim is resisting and the offender uses violence or threats to overpower and subdue the victim.

Question 32

Aggravated Robbery
Section 235, Crimes Act 1961
14 years imprisonment max

Answer 32

a. Robs any person and, at the time of, or immediately before or immediately after, the robbery, causes grievous bodily harm to any person, or
b. Being together with any person or persons, robs any person, or
c. Being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, or any thing appearing to be such a weapon or instrument, robs any other person.

Question 33

Explain “at the time of” or “immediately before or after” relating to s235

Answer 33

This provision relates to where violence used to extort the property stolen or prevent or overcome resistance has resulted in really serious harm to the person assaulted.

The violence resulting in the infliction of grievous bodily harm may also have been used for some collateral purpose, such as attempting to escape after the robbery.

The term “immediately” refers to the connection in time between the robbery and the infliction of grievous bodily harm.

Question 34

Explain “causes” relating to s235

Answer 34

In this context a person causes grievous bodily harm if their actions male him or her criminally responsible for it.

Question 35

Define “grievous bodily harm”

Answer 35

Harm that is really serious.

As long as the harm is serious, it need not involve life threatening or permanent injury.

The term grievous refers to the degree of harm rather than to the nature of it or how it was caused.

Question 36

R V Joyce (1968)

Answer 36

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

Question 37

Explain “being together with any other person or persons”

Answer 37

There must be proof that, in committing the robbery, the defendant was part of a joint enterprise who were physically present at the robbery.

The forces of 2 or more persons acting together are deployed against the victim in the actual commission of the offence.

Each must share an intent to steal using their collective force and must play a some active role in the robbery.

Mere presence without participation is not sufficient.

Question 38

R V Galey (1985)

Answer 38

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

Question 39

Explain “Being armed”

Answer 39

The defendant is carrying the item or has it available for immediate use as a weapon

Question 40

Possession of offensive weapons or disabling substances

Section 202A, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 40

In subsection 4)a) of this section 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.

E.g.
Made= firearms/knuckle duster
Altered= smashed bottle
Intended to cause injury= baseball bat/knife

Question 41

Define “instrument”

Answer 41

Includes any item intended to be used as a weapon or to intimidate and overbearing the victims will to resist.

Question 42

Explain “anything appearing to be a weapon”

Answer 42

It must be proved both that the object appeared to be an offensive weapon or instrument to the victim, and that the defendant intended or it was at least reckless as to the possibility that it would be perceived as a weapon.

However a thing does not include a part of a person’s body.

Question 43

Assault with intent to rob
Section 236, Crimes Act 1961
Imprisonment 14 years max or 7 years max

Answer 43

1. ) With intent to rob any person:
   a. Causes grievous bodily harm to that person or any other person, or
   b. Being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, or any thing appearing to be such h a weapon or instrument, assaults that person or any other person, or
   c. Being together with any other person or persons, assaults that person or any other person
2. ) Every one who assaults any person with intent to rob that person or any other person is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.

Question 44

“assault with intent to rob” vs aggravated robbery

Answer 44

An assault with intent to rob is essentially an unsuccessful attempt at aggravated robbery, in that the theft element is not complete.

Question 45

Assault

Section 2, Crimes Act 1961

Answer 45

Assault means the act of intentionally applying or attempting to apply force to the person of another, directly or indirectly, or threatening by any act or gesture to apply such force to the person of another, if the person making the threat has, or causes the other to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose.