Violence CIB 010 Part 2

Question 1

Robbery Act, Section & Penalty

Answer 1

234(1) CA 19612 234 (2) 10 years

Question 2

Robbery - The Liability

Answer 2

* Theft * Accompanied by violence OR threats of violence *To any person or property * Used to extort the property stolen OR Prevent or overcome resistance to it being stolen

Question 3

Theft Section + liability

Answer 3

Section 219 CA 1961 Dishonestly and without claim of right takes any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property

Question 4

Dishonestly

Answer 4

In relation to an act or omission, *means done or omitted without a belief that there was *expressed or implied consent to, *or authority for, *the act or omission from a person entitled to give such consent or authority

Question 5

Proving dishonesty - Comment

Answer 5

Is a state of mind, the fact that the defendant acted without the requisite belief and therefore dishonestly, may be infeered from the circumstances

Question 6

Claim of Right Sec 2 CA 1961

Answer 6

In relation to any act, means 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 other matter of law *other than the enactment against which the offence is alleged to have been committed.

Question 7

R v Skivington

Answer 7

Larceny (or theft) is an ingredient of Robbery,and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to larceny, then it negates one of the ingredients in the offence of robbery, without proof of which, the full offence is not made out. (Skivington went to collect his pay)

Question 8

R v Lapier

Answer 8

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

Question 9

R v Cox

Answer 9

Possession involves two elements. The first, the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, the mental element, is a combination of knowledge and intention - knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused that the substance is in his possession and an intention to exercise possession.

Question 10

Actual possession

Answer 10

Actual possession arises when the thing in question is in a person’s physical custody or immediately at hand.

Question 11

Potential possession

Answer 11

when the person has the potential to have the thing in question in their control. EG Storing the thing in question at an asscoiates house or through an agent

Question 12

Proof of possession

Answer 12

Proof of both elements physical and mental must be proved

Question 13

Control

Answer 13

Exercise authrotative or dominating influence over it.

Question 14

Property Sec 2 CA 1961

Answer 14

Includes real and personal property, and any estate or interest in any real or personal property, money, electricity, and anything in action and any other right or interest.

Question 15

Deprive the owner

Answer 15

Thief must desire or forsee as virtually certain, that the owner will never regain the property, but it is not neccessary that he intends to keep it himself.

Question 16

Accompanied by -comment

Answer 16

The prosecution must prove: -

• a connection between the violence or threats of violence and the stealing of the property. -
• The defendant had an intent to steal at the time the violence or threats were used
• The violence or threats were used for the purpose of extorting the property, or preventing or overcoming resistance to it being stolen

Question 17

R v Maihi

Answer 17

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 18

Violence

Answer 18

In the context of Robbery, violence must be more than a minimal degree of force and more than a technical assault but does not involve the infliction of bodily injury.

Related Case law- Peneha v Police

Question 19

Peneha v Police

Answer 19

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

Peneha’s handbag- Pulled victims handbag to the point where her hand was twisted where it hurt and she was forced to let go - lower end of the scale

Question 20

Threats of Violence - comment

Answer 20

A threat of violence 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, demeanor or even appearance, depending on the circumstances. (Balaclava in a dark alley) Rv Broughton

Question 21

Rv Broughton

Answer 21

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 22

Any person

Answer 22

Gender neutral, proven by judicial notice or circumstantial evidence. Violence or threats can be directed at any person, not just the victim and any property of interest.

Question 23

Used to extort the property stolen

Answer 23

Extort means to obtain by coercion or intimidation.

Extortion implies an overbearing of the will of the victim, and the prosecution must show that the threats induced the victim to part with his property.

Question 24

Prevent or overcome resistance

Answer 24

Prevent= to keep from happening Overcome= to defeat. prevail or get the better of in a conflict

Question 25

Aggravated Robbery Act, Section & penalty

Answer 25

Section 235 CA 1961 14 years

Question 26

Section 235 (a)

Answer 26

*Robs any Person * And at the time of or immediately before or immediately after the robbery * Causes GBH to Any Person

Question 27

Section 235 (b)

Answer 27

(b) Being together with any other person or persons * Robs * Any Person

Question 28

Section 235 (c)

Answer 28

(c) Being armed with any offensive weapon OR instrument OR anything appearing to be such an offensive weapon or instrument * Robs * Any person

Question 29

At the time of (Sect. 235 (a))

Answer 29

During the commission of the theft, at the time of the taking with the required intent.

Question 30

Immediately before or after

Answer 30

Refers to the connection in time between the robbery and the infliction of Grievous Bodily Harm.

Question 31

Being together with (Sec 235 (b)) comment

Answer 31

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

Question 32

R v Joyce

Answer 32

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

Question 33

R v Galey

Answer 33

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

Question 34

Joint enterprise - comment

Answer 34

Mere presence during the commission of robbery, without active particpation is not sufficient.

Question 35

Being armed

Answer 35

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

Question 36

Offensive weapon

Answer 36

Sec 202A (1) Crimes Act 1961

An article made or altered for the use of causing bodily injury or intended by the person having it with him for such a use.

Question 37

Instrument

Answer 37

Not defined by statute but will include any item intended to be used as a weapon or to intimidate and overbear the victims will to resist.

Question 38

Anything Appearing to be such a weapon or instrument

Answer 38

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 was at least reckless as to the possibility that it would be perceived as a weapon.

Question 39

Robs

Answer 39

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

Question 40

Section 236 (1) CA 1961

Answer 40

(1) With Intent to Rob any Person
(a) Causes GBH *To that person or any other person
(b) being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument, or anything appearing as such a weapon or instrument, *Assaults that person or any other person
(c) being together with any other person or persons, * assaults that person or other person

Question 41

Section 236 (2) CA 1961

Answer 41

Everyone who assaults any person with intent to rob thatb person or any other person is liablie to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 yrs

Question 42

Intent of section 236

Answer 42

Provide a more serious punishment for unsuccessful attempts at aggravated robbery or sec 192 Paras (b) & (c) do not require actual infliction of physical injury to any person.

Question 43

Section 237 CA 1961 (Liability) Section 238 CA 1961

Answer 43

1) Everyone commits blackmail who

• threatens, expressly or by implication,
• to make any accusation against any person (whether living or dead),
• to disclose something about any person (whether living or dead), or
• to cause serious damage to property or
• endanger the safety of any person
• with intent
• (a) to cause the person to whom the threat is made to act in accordance with the will of the person making the threat, and
• (b) to obtain any benefit or to cause loss to any other person 238 (14 years)

Question 44

Section 237 (2) CA 1961

Answer 44

Statutory defence:

When the defendant believes in an entitlement to obtain the benefit or to cause the loss AND the threat is objectively viewed as a reasonable and proper means for bringing that about. Up to the jury to decide if threat is reasonable and proper difference between hard bargoning and criminal blackmail

Question 45

Section 237 (3) CA 1961

Answer 45

Any benefit, pecuniary advantage, privilege, property, service, or valuable consideration

Question 46

Blackmail- what must be proved

Answer 46

1. The identity of the suspect and that they threatened, expressly or by implication to:
2. Make any accusation against any person (living or dead) or - Disclose something about any person (living or dead) or - Cause serious damage to property or - Endanger the safety of any person
3. with intent to cause the person to whom the threat is made in accordance with the will of the person making the threat and,
4. obtain any benefit or cause loss to any person.

Question 47

5 Phase investigation for Blackmail

Answer 47

• Initial report
• Mobilisation - staff and investigation options
• Consolidation - strategies and processes set up
• Investigation and operational - key is preserve life
• Reactive

Question 48

Threatens - Blackmail

Answer 48

The term threatens should be taken liberally.

It is upto the jury to decide on the meaning to be given to any words used and it does this in the light of all the evidence.

Question 49

Accusation - meaning

Answer 49

Allegation or to impute that the other person is guilty of criminal conduct Immaterial whether it is true or not

Question 50

Demanding with Intent to Steal Act, Section, Penalty

Answer 50

Section 239 (1) CA 61, 14 Years Imp

• Without claim of right
• By force or with any threat
• Compels any person to (MADE) execute, make, accept, endorse, alter, or destroy
• any document capable of conferring a pecuniary advantage
• With intent to obtain any benefit

Question 51

Demanding with Menaces- Act, Section, Penalty

Answer 51

S239(2) CA61, 7 Years Imp

• With menaces or by any threat
• Demands any property from any person
• With intent to steal it

Question 52

Menaces or any threat

Answer 52

Sufficient if the words convey a threat of something detrimental or unpleasant happening

Question 53

Intent to steal (Sec 239) comment prosecution to show..

Answer 53

Prosecution to show the defendsant acted dishonestly and without claim of right