7 Key excerpts on "Property Offences"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  An Introduction to Criminal Psychology

  • Russil Durrant(Author)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Humans are a devious species, and there are various ways that another person’s property can be acquired through illegal means. We have already discussed robbery, or the use of force to obtain property from others, in the chapter on violent offending so we will not revisit that topic here. Other forms of offending that involve the illegal acquisition of another’s property and resources such as fraud, embezzlement, and other instances of so-called white-collar crime are discussed in detail in the following chapter. Here, we confine ourselves to a relatively small range of ‘garden variety’ property crimes that, together, constitute a significant volume of all offences recorded by the police and hence are the focus of significant activity in the criminal justice system.

  Figure 9.1 The range of Property Offences.

  Different countries categorise Property Offences in different ways. In the United States, for example, the taking of property from someone else without their consent is referred to as larceny, with a distinction made between grand and petit larceny based on the value of the property taken (Brown, Esbensen, & Geis, 2015). In Figure 9.1 the main forms of property offending that feature in the criminological literature are outlined, although these categories do not necessarily map cleanly on to specific legal distinctions in different countries. Very broadly, we can make a distinction between offending that involves the acquisition of property and offending that involves the destruction or harming of property. Burglary entails illegal entry into a property with the purpose of acquiring others’ resources or property. Shoplifting entails the acquisition of goods or property from a commercial enterprise without the use of force (when it becomes robbery). Motor vehicle theft involves the theft of cars, motorcycles, snowmobiles, and other forms of motorised transport and/or the theft of property from those vehicles. Other forms of illegal property acquisition include pocket picking, purse snatching, theft of bicycles, and so on. Some types of property offending involve the destruction of property rather than its acquisition, including arson, vandalism, and graffiti.

  The prevalence of property offending

  We have already noted that Property Offences are often referred to as ‘volume crime’ because they are relatively common compared to other sorts of offending. As you will be aware by now, establishing a clear picture of the frequency of any form of crime is a difficult task, and cross-national comparisons are especially difficult for Property Offences due to different definitions, variability in policing, and so forth (see Chapter 1

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Law: The Basics

  • Jonathan Herring(Author)
  • 2009(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Property Offences

  So far in this book we have primarily focused on offences against the person. Most people agree that offences against the person are more serious than offences against property. One important reason is that the harm in Property Offences in generally easily remedied. If someone steals your car, you can buy a new one. If someone chops your hand off, you cannot. That, however, may be too simplistic a point. Property can have great emotional value. If the family photograph album is stolen, it may not be easily replaced. Some Property Offences, especially burglary, can be traumatic and some victims take quite some time to recover.

  One interesting contrast between offences against the person and those against property is as follows. The offences against the person tend to focus on the gravity of the harm: did the case involve actual bodily harm or grievous bodily harm? Whereas offences against property focus on the way the harm was done: was the property obtained by the use of fraud or force?

  THEFT

  KEY STATUTE THEFT ACT 1968, SECTION 1

  A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it ...

  Theft is one of the most common criminal offences. There are five elements of theft. D is guilty if he or she: •  appropriates •  property •  belonging to another •  dishonestly •  with intent to permanently deprive. These elements will be considered in turn. ‘ … APPROPRIATES … ’

  Appropriation involves ‘assuming the rights of an owner’. In other words it means that a person has treated the property in the way an owner would. The courts have made it clear that the defendant will have appropriated the property if he has exercised one of the rights of the owner. This means that the defendant will appropriate property if she moves it, eats it, sells it or throws it away.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Law for Criminologists

  Principles and Theory in Criminal Justice

  • Noel Cross(Author)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Chapter 5

  Property Offences

  Chapter overview

  Introduction Property Offences: the law Theft Vehicle theft Fraud Burglary Criminal damage Robbery Property Offences and criminal justice Theft and criminal justice Vehicle theft and criminal justice Fraud and criminal justice Burglary and criminal justice Criminal damage and criminal justice Robbery and criminal justice Conclusions: linking discussion to the roadmap theories Further reading

  Chapter aims

  After reading Chapter 5 , you should be able to understand:

  • The actus reus requirements, mens rea requirements, and available defences for the offences of theft, vehicle theft, fraud, burglary, criminal damage, and robbery in criminal law

  • How criminal justice responds to these types of Property Offences

  • How the evidence on these Property Offences in criminal law and criminal justice fits in with the roadmap theories introduced in Chapter 1

  Introduction

  Chapter 5 discusses the main types of criminal offences against property. This chapter explains the Property Offences of theft, vehicle theft, fraud, burglary, criminal damage, and robbery in terms of their legal definitions, before placing them in their criminal justice contexts.

  Property Offences: the law

  Theft

  Statutory definition Theft is defined by the Theft Act 1968 s.1(1) as the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another person, with the intention to permanently deprive that other person of it.

  Actus reus

  The actus reus of theft has three elements. The first is an ‘appropriation’. ‘Appropriation’ is defined by s.3(1) of the Theft Act as an assumption of the rights of the owner of the property. DPP v Gomez [1993] AC 442 decided that there can be an appropriation even where V consents to D taking their property, following Lawrence [1972] AC 626.

  Gomez also decided that an assumption of any (not all) of the property owner’s rights was enough to count as an appropriation. So what the law says is an appropriation is more than just taking someone’s property without their consent. Hinks

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Understanding Criminal Law

  • Rodger Geary(Author)
  • 2012(Publication Date)
  • Routledge-Cavendish

    (Publisher)

  Chapter 6

  Offences Against Property (1)

  Theft

  Definition

  The basic definition of theft is to be found in s 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968, which provides that a person who: ... dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it ...is guilty of theft.

  Actus Reus

  Property

  Section 4(1) of the Theft Act 1968 defines ‘property’ as: ... money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property. This seemingly all encompassing definition is subject to both common law and statutory exceptions. The following do not constitute property:

  • information (Oxford v Moss (1979));
  • electricity (Low v Blease (1975));
  • a human corpse (R v Sharpe (1857));
  • land (s 4(2));
  • wild plants (s 4(3));
  • wild animals (s 4(4)).

  However, there are also some exceptions to the exceptions rendering some of the above capable of being stolen in certain circumstances:

  • a human corpse becomes property capable of being stolen if skill or effort has been exercised on it (Doodeward v Spence (1907)). Moreover, products of the body such as blood and urine are capable of being stolen (R v Rothery (1976); R v Welsh (1974));
  • land can be appropriated by:
    1. a trustee, personal representative or liquidator;
    2. someone not in possession can appropriate anything which can be severed from the land; and
    3. a tenant can appropriate any fixture (s 4(2)(a), (b) and (c));
  • wild plants can be stolen if the whole plant is taken or the plant is taken for sale or reward (s 4(3)); wild animals can be stolen if they are tamed or ordinarily kept in captivity or have been, or are in the process of being, reduced into another’s possession (s 4(4)).

  Intangible Property

  As we have seen, the definition of ‘property’ contained in s 4 of the Theft Act 1968 includes intangible as well as tangible property. The law of theft therefore extends to protect such things as the debt owed by a bank to an account holder, either in the form of a bank balance (R v Kohn (1979)) or in the form of an agreed overdraft facility (Chan Man Sin v R (1988)). The property which is protected here is not the account holder’s money, but the account holder’s right to sue the bank for whatever sum is wrongfully transferred from the account. This is the case even if the bank is bound, as debtor of its customer, to replenish the account (R v Hilton (1997); R v Williams (2000)). Other forms of intangible property would include patents, copyright, shares, debts, export and other quotas which could be traded for value (AG for Hong Kong v Nai-Keung

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Lawcards 2012-2013

  • Routledge(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  5

  Offences against property

  Theft Robbery Burglary Criminal damage Fraud Making off without payment Handling stolen goods This chapter concludes our analysis of particular offences by examining offences against property.

  (1) THEFT

  Definition

  The basic definition of theft is to be found in s 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968 , which provides that a person who:

  …dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it

  is guilty of theft. Relevant sections of Theft Act 1968

  Actus reus

  The actus reus of the offence is ‘appropriating property belonging to another’.

  Appropriation

  Appropriation is defined in s 3(1) of the Theft Act 1968 as

  any assumption by a person or the rights of an owner.

  The phrase ‘any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner’ means that the thief has taken to himself rights which he does not have and is dealing with the property as if he was the legal owner.

  The term ‘the rights of the owner’ includes not only the owner’s right to ownership but also other rights he may have. It includes rights to possession or control, the right to use the property, to sell it, to give it away and so on.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Q&A Criminal Law

  • Norman Baird(Author)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  6 Offences against Property INTRODUCTION

  Most criminal law examination papers include a number of questions raising issues in respect of the major Property Offences. As problem questions are often constructed to test your knowledge of a number of offences, most of the questions in this chapter require discussion of the defendant’s potential liability for more than one offence.

  Checklist

  Theft and related offences – the Theft Act 1968 :

    theft:

  s 1

  ;

    robbery:

  s 8

  ; assault with intent to rob:

  s 8(2)

  ;

    blackmail:

  s 21

  ;

    burglary:

  s 9(1)

  ;

    aggravated burglary:

  s 10

  ;

    abstracting of electricity:

  s 13

  ;

    false accounting:

  s 17

  ;

    going equipped:

  s 25

  ;

    making off without payment:

  s 3

  of the

  Theft Act 1978

  .

  Fraud and related offences – the Fraud Act 2006 :

    fraud:

  s 1(1)

  ;

    obtaining services dishonestly:

  s 11

  ;

    possession of articles for use in frauds:

  s 6

  ;

    making or supplying articles for use in frauds:

  s 7

  .

  Offences of damage – the Criminal Damage Act 1971 :

    criminal damage:

  s1(1)

  ;

    ‘aggravated’ damage:

  s1(2)

  ;

    arson:

  s 1(3)

  ;

    threats to destroy or damage property:

  s 2

  .

  QUESTION 27 Innit, via the internet, downloaded software on to his computer. There was a charge for the software which Innit paid using the details from a stolen credit card. He then went to a local restaurant and ordered lunch. He knew he had insufficient money to pay for the meal but, as planned, he left without paying when the owner was not looking.

  Innit then went to the local leisure centre. The adult entry fee was £5 except for the unemployed for whom there was no charge. Innit presented a forged unemployment card to the cashier and was given access free of charge to the centre wherein he used the sauna.

  ◗  Discuss Innit’s criminal liability.

  How to Read this Question

  This question raises issues concerning a number of offences under the Fraud Act 2006 . These include fraud contrary to s 1 , obtaining services dishonestly contrary to s 11, possession of articles for use in frauds contrary to s 6

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Criminal Law

  • (Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Straightforward Publishing Digital

    (Publisher)

  6

  Property Offences and fraud generally

  Theft and other related offences

  The legislation covering theft and other related offences is the Theft Act 1968 and the Theft Act 1979. Theft is a triable either-way offence and the maximum sentence is seven years.

  Sections 1-7 of the Theft Act 1968 covers the law of theft with section 1 defining theft. This definition is that a person is guilty of theft if he ‘dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it’.

  Section 3 of the Theft Act covers the meaning of ‘appropriates’. This states:

  ....any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to be an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner.

  A person therefore appropriates property when he assumes the rights of the true owner. One case illustrating this is Pitham and Hehl 1977, where the Court of Appeal decided that a man who invited the two defendants into his friend’s house whilst he was in prison and then sold them some of his furniture, had been assuming the rights of the owner. Not all the rights of the owner need to be appropriated. One case that illustrates this is Anderton and Burnside 1984. In this case, the shopper had removed the price label from a joint of pork and replaced it with a lower price label from another item. He was arrested and appealed on the basis that he had not appropriated property belonging to another, because he had not assumed the rights of the real owner. The appeal was dismissed after the House of Lords decided that they had assumed at least one of the rights of the real owner.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book