Basic Criminal Damage / Arson

Front 1

S1 (1) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 1

Basic criminal damage.

Front 2

S1 (3) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 2

Basic arson

Front 3

Actus Reus of Criminal Damage

Back 3

Destroying or damaging property belonging to another (by fire - S1 (3)).

Front 4

Mens Rea of Criminal Damage

Back 4

Intentionally/recklessly doing the damage or destruction without lawful excuse knowing it belonged to another.

Front 5

Gayford v Chouler (1898)

Back 5

Slight damage, even the trampling of grass, is sufficient.

Front 6

Destroy meaning

Back 6

Making the property useless, even if not completely destroyed.

Front 7

Roe v Kingerlee (1986)

Back 7

Whether property has been damaged is a "matter of fact and degree". Can be temporary or permanent.

Front 8

Hardman v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary (1986)

Back 8

Damage is based on whether it will take time, money and effort to remove.

Front 9

A v R (1995)

Back 9

If there are no costs or efforts involved in clearing up, and the property can continue to be used, this isn't damage.

Front 10

Morphitis v Salmon (1990)

Back 10

The type and purpose of property is relevant. A scaffolding pole is likely to be scratched in its lifetime.

Front 11

S10 (1) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 11

Includes property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal; including money, wild creatures and carcasses. Doesn't include funghi, flowers, fruit or foliage growing wild on any land.

Front 12

S10 (2) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 12

Property belongs to any person:

a) - Having custody or control of it.

b) - Having in it any proprietary right or interest.

c) - Having a charge on it.

Front 13

R v Pembilton (1874)

Back 13

The defendant needs to intend to do the actual damage or destruction. Not liable if they do the damage whilst attempting to do something else.

Front 14

R v Smith (1974)

Back 14

If the defendant has an honest belief that the property is his own, whether justifiable or not, he's not liable. Cannot be liable if the property is the defendant's own, unless the aggravated offence.

Front 15

R v Gemmell and Richards (2003) recklessness test

Back 15

1. Was the defendant aware the risk existed?

2. Was it unreasonable for the defendant to take the risk known to him?

Front 16

Without lawful excuse

S5 (2) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 16

Applies where the defendant honestly believes that:

a) - The owner or another person with rights in the property would have consented to the damage; or

b) - Other property was at risk and in immediate need of protection.

Front 17

S3 and S5 (2) (a) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 17

Allow a defence of belief in consent to be used even if the defendant is intoxicated.

Front 18

Jaggard v Dickinson (1980)

Back 18

The defendants' honest belief is only of relevance; regardless of intoxication, stupidity, forgetfulness or inattention.

Front 19

S5 (2) (b) Criminal Damage Act 1971

Back 19

Covers the protection of property in immediate need of proection.

Front 20

R v Hunt (1978)

Back 20

The protection needs to be to property which is in immediate need of protection.

Front 21

Blake v DPP (1973)

Back 21

God cannot consent to damage and the protection of property needs to be realistic and in immediate need of protection. The item being protected needs to be property.

Front 22

R v Cresswell and Currie (2006)

Back 22

The property being protected needs to be reduced into possession and belong to another.

Front 23

R v Baker and Wilkins (1997)

Back 23

Damaging property to protect other people is not allowed as a defence. Can only be of lawful excuse in respect to other property.

Front 24

R v Miller (1983)

Back 24

Arson may be committed by omission.