Robbery. Lesson Objectives I will be able to state the definition of robbery I will be able to explain the actus reus and mens rea of robbery I will be.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fraud and making off without payment
Advertisements

Fraud – Obtaining Services Dishonestly Fraud Act 2006, s11.
Conspiracy By Ashley Geeves. What is conspiracy? An agreement between two or more people to do an unlawful act. Most conspiracies are charged as statutory.
Forms of Mens Rea Intent: Mental desire and will to act in a particular way. Example: Desiring to murder someone and acting in a way consistent with achieving.
NON-FATAL OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON
Robbery and Burglary A basic outline …. Advice … Do not chat while a lecture is being given. Read and precis prior to a lecture. Turn off your mobile.
Criminal Damage Act 1971 Basic Offence of Criminal Damage s.1(1)
Non Fatal - ABH Non Fatal Offences Against the Person © The Law Bank Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Non Fatal Offences – s.47 Offences Against the.
Topic 10 Intoxication Topic 10 Intoxication. Topic 10 Intoxication Introduction A defendant can become intoxicated by means of alcohol or drugs or both.
Inchoate offences In this lecture, we will consider the inchoate offences of: attempt conspiracy incitement.
TWO MAIN ELEMENTS OF CRIME. Most crimes require the following two elements in order for a crime to have been committed and a person to be guilty and liable.
Criminal Law: general principles Sources of law Sources of law Common law vs. statutes Common law vs. statutes Model Penal Code Model Penal Code Felonies.
Crimes Against Property Copyright, 2000 Charles L. Feer.
Topic 13 Theft Topic 13 Theft. Topic 13 Theft Definition ‘Theft’ is defined in s.1 of the Theft Act 1968: ‘A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly.
Burglary. Lesson Objectives I will be able to state the definition of burglary I will be able to explain the actus reus and mens rea of burglary under.
Other offences under the Theft Act 1968 In this lecture, we will consider the offences of: Robbery; Burglary; Blackmail.
Elements of an Offence, Intention & Involvement in a Crime *The Elements of a Crime Actus Reus + Mens Rea =Crime “The Guilty Act: demonstrates a voluntary.
Robbery and Burglary A basic outline … PRECIS NOTES WILL BE CHECKED 1.
Mrs Howe Robbery and Burglary A2 Criminal Law. Mrs Howe Robbery Ghazala holds a knife to the throat of a ten year old boy and orders the Childs mother.
I NCHOATE O FFENCES : M ADE W ITH Y OU I N M IND.
Topic 12 Attempts Topic 12 Attempts. Topic 12 Attempts Introduction If a defendant fully intends to commit a crime but for some reason fails to complete.
Offences against the person
Principles of criminal liability
Criminal Law. A Crime is any action or omission of an act that is prohibited and punishable by law. A Crime is any action or omission of an act that is.
Criminal Law.
Mens Rea - Recklessness Elements of Criminal Liability © The Law Bank Elements of Criminal Liability Mens Rea - Recklessness 1.
Elements of a Crime. Learning Goal:  By the end of this lessons, I will be able to accurately define and identify the essential elements of a criminal.
Defences Intoxication. Lesson Objectives I will be able to state the definition of the defence of intoxication I will be able to distinguish between crimes.
The Nature Of Crime Chapter 6. What Is A Crime? A crime is an act or omission of an act that is prohibited and punishable under federal statute. A crime.
WHAT IS CRIME? IT IS SENSATIONALIZE BY TV, NEWSPAPERS AND MYSTERY NOVELS. CRIMINALS CAUSE GRIEF AND SUFFERING TO THEIR VICTIMS AND COST THE TAXPAYERS BILLIONS.
Topic 4 Involuntary manslaughter. Topic 4 Actus reus Involuntary manslaughter has the same actus reus as murder (unlawful killing) but a different mens.
Robbery Angela + Hadi.
The Elements of a Crime To convict some one of a crime the crown must prove that two elements existed.
CRIMINAL CODE Summary Conviction Offences QUASI-CRIMINAL LAW Hybrid Offences Indictable Offences MOTIVE ACTUS REUS MENS REA INTENTKNOWLEDGE RECKLESSNESS.
Topic 15 Robbery Topic 15 Robbery. Topic 15 Robbery Introduction Robbery is defined in the Theft Act According to s.8: ‘A person is guilty of robbery.
The Crimes Amendment (Gang and Vehicle Related Offences) Act 2001 s 154C CARJACKING.
+ Involvement in a Crime. + Division of Blame In a crime, the act is normally not carried out by just one person. How does the law divide blame amount.
Actus Reus and Mens Rea. Actus ReusMens Rea What Do They Mean? -Means a “wrongful deed” -The physical or guilty act, omission, or state of being that.
TWO MAIN ELEMENTS OF CRIME Page Most crimes require the following two elements in order for a crime to have been committed and a person to be.
Defences Duress by threats. Lesson objectives I will be able to state the definition of the defence of duress by threats I will be able to explain how.
Crime CLN4U. Legal Definition In Canada, a crime can be defined as any act or omission, the doing of which is an offence under federal legislation In.
Chapter 5 Mens Rea, Concurrence, and Causation. Mens Rea (Criminal Intent)  The mental part of crimes:  Mens rea (guilty mind)  Scienter (guilty knowledge)
Underlying principles of criminal liability
Criminal Law. INCHOATE OFFENCES ACCOMPLICES They cover illegal acts which have yet to be committed, primarily attempts to commit crimes, incitement to.
Criminal Damage. Lesson Objectives I will be able to state the definitions of the 3 types of criminal damage I will be able to explain the actus reus.
Assault and Battery. 2 separate offences One can be committed without the other Together they are called “common assault” Both common law offences But.
Chapter 9 Robbery, Extortion and Bribery This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following are prohibited by law:
Elements of Crime. For an offender to be convicted of a criminal offence, at common law the prosecution usually must prove: –Actus reus –Mens rea –causation.
Topic 14 Burglary Topic 14 Burglary. Topic 14 Burglary Introduction Burglary is defined in the Theft Act According to s.9(1), a person is guilty.
If so which one?. Raising a fist behind a person’s back as if to strike them but changing your mind.
CRIMINAL OFFENCES PULP FICTION KEVIN SAKAI – HAYDEN SO – AARON ANG – KIRBY SO.
Criminal Liability Application Question June 2012.
ROBBERY Section 8 Theft Act Definition “A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order.
Violent Crimes.  Offences against the Person and Reputation- Part VIII of the Criminal Code  Violent in nature and cause harm to the human body  Also:
Law - Offences. Theft “ A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving.
2.6 CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY AND RELATED DEFENCES.
Offences under the Theft Act Theft Background Statutory offence – Theft Act 1968 – “the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another.
Preliminary offences of attempt
Principles of criminal liability
Assault Learning Objectives Define Assault
PROPERTY OFFENCES, INCLUDING THEFT AND ROBBERY Robbery
Robbery.
PROPERTY OFFENCES, INCLUDING THEFT AND ROBBERY BURGLARY
Burglary.
Preliminary offences of attempt
Criminal Code Offences
Theft Mens Rea.
Blackmail.
Making off without payment
Duress of circumstances
Presentation transcript:

Robbery

Lesson Objectives I will be able to state the definition of robbery I will be able to explain the actus reus and mens rea of robbery I will be able to explain cases that illustrate robbery I will be able to apply the rules to a given situation

Robbery Robbery can be seen very simply as theft with force The offence of robbery is defined in the Theft Act 1968, s8(1) as: A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force

Robbery is, therefore, an aggravated form of theft. The actus reus is: – The actus reus of theft – Use of force or putting or seeking to put any person in fear of subjection to force in order to steal immediately before or at the time of stealing The mens rea is: – The mens rea of theft – Intent or recklessness as to the use or threat or force

Therefore, all the limitations to the offence of theft, such as the limits on what can be stolen, are equally applicable. There are a number of points to be considered: – What amounts to force on a person? – What amounts to a threat of force on a person? – When does the force or threat of force have to take place? – What connection must there be between the force and the theft? It is essential that the offence of theft has been committed before there can be a conviction for robbery

What amounts to force or threat of force on a person? The word ‘force’ is not defined in the Act. However, the force, or threat of force must be sufficient to be noticeable, but not necessarily to the victim – waving a knife at a blind man would probably be sufficient What would not be sufficient would be the threat of future violence – this would not fulfil the definition and would probably be blackmail

There is no need to use any technical meaning to the term ‘force’ – Dawson and James (1976) – force is required for robbery, but the word has no special meaning; it is up to the jury to decide whether the defendant’s actions amounted to force It appears that it does not matter whether the victim is actually put in fear or not: it is the defendant's intention that matters. The fact that the victim was not afraid does not mean the defendant did not attempt to put fear in him. B and R v DPP (2007) – as long as the defendant's intention is to put the victim in fear of violence, it does not matter whether he in fact does so

It also appears that there does not have to be direct force on the victim. The word force is all that is required, so the jury can decide if it was sufficient. Clouden (1987) – the force does not have to be direct force on the victim; in this case it was to her bag It is also the case that the threat does not have to be as the victim imagines if it is intended to cause fear – Bentham (2005) – so long as there is the intention to create fear, it does not matter that the threat was not real; in this case, the defendant used his fingers inside his jacket to make it look like he was holding a gun

When does the force or threat of force have to take place? The importance of this question is that the definition requires the force or threat of force to take place immediately before or at the time of stealing This deliberately makes the time when the force is used fairly fluid within the overall time that the crime took place Hale (1978) – the act of stealing can be a continuing act; the jury can decide when the appropriation is complete

In some cases the actual stealing and appropriation may be very brief Corcoran and Anderton (1980) – knocking a handbag out of the victim’s grasp with force was sufficient for there to be a robbery even though the robber did not take the bag At the other end of the scale, a line must be drawn even though continuing possession of the goods stolen would appear to make it a continuing act – Atakpu (1994)

What connection must there be between the force and the theft? The force or threat of force must be used in order to steal. If the force or threat of force is used for a different purpose (such as rape), then it is not robbery. Where the force is used to allow the theft to happen, then it can be robbery (keys to a building)

Exam Q’s