Criminal Damage

Criminal Law A2 Mrs Howe

Criminal Damage Act 1971

     Four Offences: Basic offence of criminal damage Aggravated criminal damage Arson Aggravated arson Mrs Howe

Basic Offence

Write out the definition of criminal damage. S1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act Pg 155.

Actus Reus:  Destroy or damage   Property Belonging to another Mens Rea:   Specific intention to destroy or damage the property or Recklessness as to whether the property is destroyed or damaged Mrs Howe

Destroy or Damage

         No definition in new act. Same phrase used in law prior to 1971 act- precedent Damage should be interpreted widely Slight damage is enough- Gayford V Chouler- grass Destroy much stronger, includes where property made useless but not completely destroyed Does not have to be permanent- Roe V Kingerlee 1986 If it costs time, money and or effort to remove the damage- then criminal damage has occurred Hardman V Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary 1986, Blake V DPP, Flak 2005.

If no costs or effort in clearing up and can still be used no criminal damage. A (A) Juvenile V R 1978 –spit Type and purpose of property will be taken into account. Morphitis v Salmon 1990-scaffolding pole Mrs Howe

Activity

 Do activity on pg 157 of book Mrs Howe

Task

 Create a Table of Cases to explain Criminal Damage- Actus Reus Mrs Howe

Property

    Is defined in S 10 (1) CD Act 1971 Property of a tangible nature whether real or personal Includes animals, wild or domestic Not mushrooms, fruit, flowers, foliage of a plant growing wild.

Mrs Howe

Belonging to Another

   Set out in 10 (2) CDA 1971 Property is treated as belonging to any person  having the custody or control of it or   Having in it any propriety right or interest or having a charge on it.

For basic Criminal Damage property must belong to someone else. Not necessary for other offences.

Mrs Howe

Mens Rea

   Must do damage either: Intentionally or Recklessly Subjective recklessness- Maliciously and Unlawful Mrs Howe

Intention

   Must proof D intended to :   destroy or damage property belonging to another.

Proving an act not enough- Pembilton 1874 Believing property is yours – means no intention to damage property belonging to another - Smith 1974 Mrs Howe

Recklessness

    Initially courts used subjective recklessness test. Stephenson- Tramp Haystack However in Metropolitan Police Commissioner V Caldwell 1981 H of L Ruled that a person is reckless were they do an act which in fact created an obvious risk and had   a not given any thought to consequence or (objective) b gave thought but carried on (subjective) Objective test hard on some D- Elliott v C Mrs Howe

Task

 Create a Table of Cases to explain Mens Rea Required for criminal damage Mrs Howe

Without Lawful Excuse

Two Lawful excuses D must honestly believe one of these The owner would have consented to the damage or Other property was at risk and in need of immediate protection and what he did was reasonable in all the circumstances.

Belief in consent- Denton-Mill owner-fire Defence of mistake allowed even were intoxicated Jaggard V Dickinson 1980 Belief property needs protection Greenpeace- GM crops Hunt 1978 (fire-home) Mrs Howe

Task

     Create a Table of Cases to explain each of the following Criminal Damage- Actus Reus Mens Rea Defences Separate tables for each point of law Mrs Howe

Activity

  Read activity on page 164 of the Jackie Martin book and Answer questions in your book Mrs Howe

Problems With The Law

 Read Pg 164-165 and identify what are the key problems with this area of law.

Mrs Howe

Summary

Mrs Howe

Exam Question

 Critically consider what difficulties the courts have encountered in interpreting the offence of criminal damage  OCR Jan 2003 Mrs Howe