Robbery, Burglary and Blackmail

Question 1

A-G’s Reference (Nos. 1 and 2 of 1979)

Answer 1

Ratio: Conditional intent is sufficient for the MR of burglary.

Question 2

B and S v Leathley

Answer 2

Ratio: Example of a building.

Facts: Concerned a large industrial freezer unit that had been in place for 2 years, was attached to electricity and had been taken off its wheels.

Question 3

Norfolk Constabulary v Seekings and Gould

Answer 3

Ratio: Example of a structure that was not a building.

Facts: Concerned an industrial freezer unit that was still on its wheels.

Question 4

R v Collins

Answer 4

Ratio: 1. Trespass means entering without permission. 2. The defendant only needs to know that he is intentionally or recklessly trespassing in fact, not in law.

Facts: Defendant climbed a ladder naked. Woman in the room thought he was her boyfriend and invited him in to have sex with her.

Question 5

R v Jenkins

Answer 5

Ratio: No MR is required for GBH in a s.9(1)(b) burglary. Note that this has been criticised but is still good law.

Question 6

R v Jones and Smith

Answer 6

Ratio: Entering as a trespasser includes entering in excess of permission.

Facts: Defendant entered his father’s house with permission. He then stole two TVs. Held he did not have permission to steal the TVs.

Question 7

R v Kelly

Answer 7

Ratio: A weapon, which is not adapted for use, can become a weapon of offence when used during a burglary. It must be shown that D intended to use the object as a weapon of offence at the time the theft is committed.

Facts: Defendant brought a screwdriver with him when stealing from a house. He used it during the burglary by stabbing a man in the stomach with it.

Question 8

R v Klass

Answer 8

Ratio: Defendant must enter with a weapon (aggravated s.9(1)(a) TA) or have it with him when carrying out the theft (for aggravated s.9(1)(b) TA).

Question 9

R v Laing

Answer 9

Ratio: Defendant must be a trespasser at the time of entry to be liable for burglary.

Facts: Defendant hid in the back room of a shop and was later found. He had initially entered with permission.

Question 10

R v O’Leary

Answer 10

Ratio: No requirement to have weapon at the time of entry for an aggravated s.9(1)(b) burglary but there is for aggravated s.9(1)(a).

Facts: Defendant entered house unarmed and later picked up a kitchen knife. Convicted of s.9(1)(b).

Question 11

R v Ryan

Answer 11

Ratio: Entry occurs when any part of the body enters.

Facts: Defendant got his head and one arm stuck in a window while committing a burglary. This was held to constitute effective entry.

Question 12

R v Stones

Answer 12

Ratio: Defendant only needs to have a weapon on him for aggravated burglary, no need to actually use it.

Facts: Defendant was caught with a knife when committing a burglary. He argued he had no intention of using it for the burglary but was using it for self-defence.

Question 13

R v Walkington

Answer 13

Ratio: A part of a building can be a distinct area that a defendant is not allowed in, even if he has permissions to be in another part of the building.

Facts: Defendant opened a till behind a mobile reception desk. Held to be burglary as he did not have permission to be behind the desk.

Question 14

Stevens v Gourley

Answer 14

Ratio: A building is ‘a structure of considerable size and intended to be permanent or at least to endure for a considerable time’.

Question 15

R v Dawson and James

Answer 15

Ratio: For a robbery, the force need not be substantial.

Facts: A nudge was sufficient force.

Question 16

R v Hale

Answer 16

Ratio: 1. For a robbery, the force need not be substantial. 2. Appropriation can be a continuing act so if force is used after the actual theft there may still be a robbery.

Facts: D and co-accused went into house with stockings on their heads. D put his hand over V’s mouth. Accomplice went upstairs and stole jewellery box. The men then tied V up and told her not to call the police for 5 minutes after they had left otherwise they would harm her son.

Question 17

R v Clouden

Answer 17

Ratio: For robbery, force can be applied through property.

Facts: A handbag was pulled.

Question 18

R v DPP

Answer 18

Ratio: For robbery, there is no need for the victim to actually fear force, sufficient to apprehend.

Question 19

R v Taylor

Answer 19

Ratio: For robbery, there is no need for the victim to actually fear force, sufficient to apprehend.

Facts: D gave bank cashier a note which demanded that the cashier handed over money or D would hurt the customer behind him. No force was used at any point, nor was the customer in fear. No robbery.

Question 20

R v Donaghy and Marshall

Answer 20

Ratio: The issue in determining whether the threat is made immediately before or at the time of stealing is whether the threat is working on the mind of the victim.

Question 21

Ivey v Genting

Answer 21

Ratio: Test for dishonesty - 1. What was D’s actual state of knowledge/belief as to the facts surrounding his actions? 2. Once state of mind established, were his actions dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people?

Question 22

R v Collister and Warhurst

Answer 22

Ratio: For blackmail, the demand can be express or implied.

Facts: Defendant were police officers who implied that the victim would be arrested unless he met them the following evening and gave them money.

Question 23

R v Lawrence and Pomeroy

Answer 23

Ratio: Menaces is an ordinary word that needs no elaboration.

Question 24

Thorne v Motor Trade Association

Answer 24

Ratio: Menaces means - a threat of ‘any action detrimental or unpleasant tot he person addressed’.

Facts: Claimant was a member of a trade union that had a stop list on which the names of those who had infringed an association rule were placed. The name would not be put on the list if the relevant member paid the fine within 21 days.

Question 25

R v Clear

Answer 25

Ratio: 1. The menaces must be such that an ordinary person of normal stability and courage might be influenced by them. 2. Can consider facts about the particular victim that might make them vulnerable.

Facts: Defendant was driver of a transit vehicle with £3000 of good in. He had locked the vehicle and set the alarms but the goods were stolen. He refused to give evidence to this effect when asked by the MD unless he was paid £300. Convicted of blackmail.

Question 26

R v Harry

Answer 26

Ratio: Menaces must be fairly stern.

Facts: D had written to a number of shopkeepers asking them to buy a poster in aid of charity to ‘protect you from any RAG activity which may inconvenience you’. Held not to be menaces.

Question 27

R v Garwood

Answer 27

Ratio: Can consider facts about the particular victim that might make them vulnerable.

Facts: D accused V of having robbed his house. He asked the victim if he had a TV or some jewellery which he could have ‘to make it quits’. V gave him £10. D then demanded £20 three days later as protection money. V was particularly timid and D knew this.

Question 28

R v Lambert

Answer 28

Ratio: 1. Menaces can be to a third party. 2. It doesn’t matter if the defendant doesn’t have the means to carry the menaces out.

Question 29

R v Harvey, Ulyett and Plummer

Answer 29

Ratio: It is unlikely that a threat of a criminal offence will ever be proper.

Facts: Appellant had ordered £20,000 worth of cannabis from the victim. The victim did not deliver cannabis and so the defendant kidnapped the victim and his family in an attempt to get the money back. Although they had reasonable ground for making the demand in a sense, the menaces to kill the victim were not proper.