theft s2 dishonesty Flashcards
Mens rea for theft?
The mens rea for theft requires a person to dishonestly appropriate, with the intention of permanently deprive.
Under s2(1) what are the 3 scenarios in which theft acts are not dishonest?
If D appropriates the property in the belief that:
(a) ‘he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or a third person’ OR
(b) ‘he would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it’ OR
(c) ‘the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps’
What happened in the case of Robinson 1977?
D took money from V. V’s wife owed the money to D. D argued, the money was not appropriated dishonestly, therefore there was no theft, therefore there could be no robbery.
It is part A as he thought he had the legal right to the money
Not guilty as not dishonest
What happened in Holden 1991?
D took tyres from his former employer in the belief that he had permission to remove the tyres, or believed it would have been granted had he sought it. NOT GULITY
This part B as he thought he had consent (or he thought he would have consent if the owner knew of the circumstances
It didn’t matter that the belief was reasonable or notjust that he had that belief.
What happened in r v Small?
The appellant took a car which he believed had been abandoned. It had been left in the same place for two weeks with the keys in the ignition. His conviction for theft was quashed as he believed the owner could not be found. There is no requirement that the defendant’s belief is reasonable so it was immaterial that a reasonable person would have known to contact the DVLA to discover the owner.
Willingness to pay: Under s2(2) the fact that D is willing to pay for the property does not preclude (rule out) what?
Dishonesty
If a D cannot prove that they were not dishonest under S2 (2) which test should the jury apply?
The case law – the test for dishonestly
Test Ghosh law
