OFFENCES AGAINST PROPERTY: ROBBERY
defined in s8 of Theft Act 1968
indictable offence with a maximum life sentence
“theft accompanied by use or threat of force before or at time of stealing and in order to steal”- s8 TA
bop on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that d is guilty
AR
same AR as theft- appropriating property belonging to another . If there is no theft, then there is no robbery ROBINSON
there must be a completed theft COROCAN V ANDERTON even though ran off without bag, all elements had ben completed
force not need be substantial DAWSON AND JAMES, but must be more than trivial P V DPP
s8 says that 1. the force or the threat of force must be used immediately before or at the time of the theft HALE expanded this to include force being used in order to escape (theft was ongoing when d was tied up, continuing act of appropriation) 2. it MUST be in order to steal
force or threat of force can be used on any person, not just victim
Force/threat of force must be used in order to steal
“force”
DAWSON held force can be ‘minimal’
words alone can be enough CLOUDEN
can include things like wrenching a bag CLOUDEN
snatching a cigarette was not counted as force P V DPP
B AND R V DPP schoolboy surrounded by gang of youths- no serious violence, was pushed- but courts upheld convictions . v said wasn’t scared but court held no need to show v was scared but that d did try scare them
MR
Mens rea same as theft.
intention to steal and intention or recklessness as to force ROBINSON
R V WATERS no intention to permanently deprive V of phone
dishonesty , the ivy test (would a reasonable person think that d was dishonest by the standards of a reasonable dishonest person), intend to permanently deprive the other of the property . must intend to use force/threat of force .
‘intent’ defined in MOHAN as a ‘desire to bring about the prohibited consequences’