|
Under English law, the Criminal Damage Act 1971 is the main statute covering damage to property. It repealed the common law and all the statutory offences except those under the Malicious Damage Act 1861. It also repealed the offence of arson but allowed the use of the term for charging purposes. Image File history File links SmallLadyJustice. ...
Criminal law (also known as penal law) is the body of law that punishes criminals for committing offences against the state. ...
This article concerns the common-law legal system, as contrasted with the civil law legal system; for other meanings of the term, within the field of law, see common law (disambiguation). ...
Actus reus is the action (or inaction, in the case of criminal negligence and similar crimes which are sometimes called acts of omission) which, in combination with the mens rea (guilty mind), produces criminal liability in common law based criminal law jurisdictions such as the United States, United Kingdom. ...
In law, causation is the name given to the process of testing whether defendants should be fixed with liability for the outcome to their acts and omissions that injure or cause loss to others. ...
Concurrence or Simultaneity is a legal term, from Western jurisprudence, referring to the simultaneous occurrence of actus reus (bad action) and mens rea (bad mind), which must be present for a crime to have occurred; except in crimes of strict liability. ...
The mens rea is the Latin term for guilty mind used in the criminal law. ...
In the criminal law, intention is one of the three general classes of mens rea necessary to constitute a conventional as opposed to strict liability crime. ...
In the criminal law, recklessness (sometimes also termed wilful blindness) is one of the three possible classes of mental state constituting mens rea (the Latin for guilty mind). To commit an offence of ordinary as opposed to strict liability, the prosecution must be able to prove both an actus reus...
Willful blindess is a term used in law to describe a situation in which an individual seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts which would render him liable. ...
Criminal negligence, in the realm of criminal common law, is a legal term of art for a state of mind which is careless, inattentive, neglectful, willfully blind, or reckless; it is the mens rea part of a crime which, if occurring simultaneously with the actus reus, gives rise to criminal...
Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Latin for ignorance of the law is no excuse) is a legal doctrine holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape punishment for violating the law merely because they were unaware of the law; that is...
In the criminal law, corporate liability is an aspect of criminal vicarious liability and determines the extent to which a corporation as a fictitious person can be convicted of offences committed by the natural persons it employs. ...
A felony, in many common law legal systems, is the term for a very serious crime; misdemeanors are considered to be less serious. ...
In many common law jurisdictions (e. ...
A hybrid offence or dual offence are the special offences in Canadian criminal law where the prosecution may choose whether to proceed with a summary offence or an indictment. ...
A misdemeanors (or misdemeanour), in many common law legal systems, is a lesser criminal act. ...
A lesser included offense, in criminal law, is a crime for which all of the elements necessary to impose liability are also elements found in a more serious crime. ...
Regulatory offences are a class of crime in which the standard for proving culpability has been lowered so as not to require any fault elements. ...
In many common law jurisdictions, the crime of battery involves an injury or other contact upon the person of another in a manner likely to cause bodily harm. ...
Mayhem, under the common law of crimes, consisted of the intentional and wanton removal of a body part that would handicap a persons ability to defend themselves in combat. ...
In the United States, larceny is a common law crime involving stealing. ...
The Skyline Parkway Motel in Afton, Virginia after an arson fire on July 9, 2004. ...
False pretenses is a common law crime. ...
Extortion is a criminal offense, which occurs when a person obtains money, behaviour, or other goods and/or services from another by wrongfully threatening or inflicting harm to this person, reputation, or property. ...
Forgery is the process of making or adapting objects or documents (see false document), with the intention to deceive. ...
Computer Crime, E-Crime, Hi-Tech Crime or Electronic Crime is a crime in which a computer plays an essential part. ...
Bribery is the practice of offering a professional or an authority person money or other favours in order to circumvent ethics or other rules in a variety of situations. ...
Perjury is lying or making verifiably false statements under oath in a court of law. ...
Obstruction of justice, in a common law state, refers to the crime of offering interference of any sort to the work of police, investigators, regulatory agencies, prosecutors, or other (usually government) officials. ...
Misprision of felony, under the common law of England, was the crime of failing to report knowledge of a felony to the appropriate authorities. ...
An inchoate offense is a crime. ...
Solicitation is a crime; it is an inchoate offense that consists of a person inciting, counseling, advising, urging, or commanding another to commit a crime with the specific intent that the person solicited commit the crime. ...
The crime of attempt occurs when a person does an act amounting to more than mere preparation for a criminal offense, with specific intent to commit a crime, if that act tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended. ...
In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more natural persons to break the law at some time in the future, so a natural person identified with the mind of a legal entity cannot conspire with the company alone. ...
An accessory is a person who assists in or conceals a crime, but does not actually participate in the commission of the crime. ...
Automatism is a disassociative state where the individual suffering from it has no control over their actions. ...
In jurisprudence, an excuse is a defense in which a defendant argues that he or she was not liable for his or her actions at the time a law was broken and thus he or she should not be held liable for a crime. ...
Self defense and defense of others (sometimes called alter ego defense or defense of a third person) are a pair of legal theories under which otherwise tortious or illegal acts may be justified when committed for the purpose of protecting oneself, or for the purpose of protecting another person. ...
In criminal law, necessity is a possible excuse for breaking the law. ...
Duress (coercion) (as a term of jurisprudence) is a possible defense, via excuse, by which a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law. ...
Defense of infancy is a form of defense by excuse; in which a defendant argues that, at the time a law was broken, they were not criminally liable for their actions, as they had not reached an age of criminal responsibility. ...
Mistake of law is a defense sometimes raised in criminal cases, although rarely with any success. ...
Mistake of law and mistake of fact are two types of defense by excuse, via which a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law or liable for damages under a civil law action. ...
In a criminal trial, the insanity defenses are possible defenses by excuse, via which defendants may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law, as they were mentally ill or mentally incompetent at the time of their allegedly criminal actions. ...
In criminal law of commonwealth countries, the defense of mental disorder - sometimes called the defence of mental illness - is a legal defence by excuse, by which a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law, as they were at the time of their...
In jurisprudence, entrapment is a procedural defense by which a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law, because they were induced (or entrapped) by the police to commit said acts. ...
An intoxication defense, in criminal law, is a defense by excuse, via which a defendant argues that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law, because they were intoxicated. ...
A non-criminal homicide, usually committed in self-defense or in defense of another, may be called justifiable homicide in some cases. ...
Criminal procedure refers to the legal process for adjudicating claims that someone has violated the criminal law. ...
A contract is any promise or set of promises made by one party to another for the breach of which the law provides a remedy. ...
In the common law, a tort is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy. ...
Property law is the law that governs the various forms of ownership in real property (land as distinct from personal or movable possessions) and in personal property, within the common law legal system. ...
In the law, a will or testament is a document by which a person (the testator) regulates the rights of others over his property or family after death. ...
The law of trusts and estates is generally considered the body of law which governs the management of personal affairs and the disposition of property of an individual in anticipation and the event of such persons incapacity or death, also known as the law of successions in civil law. ...
The law of evidence governs the use of testimony (eg. ...
English law is the law of England and Wales, rather than Scotland and Northern Ireland. ...
A statute is a formal, written law of a country or state, written and enacted by its legislative authority, perhaps to then be ratified by the highest executive in the government, and finally published. ...
This article concerns the common-law legal system, as contrasted with the civil law legal system; for other meanings of the term, within the field of law, see common law (disambiguation). ...
The Skyline Parkway Motel in Afton, Virginia after an arson fire on July 9, 2004. ...
The offences
Section 1(1) provides: - A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.
Section 1(2) provides: - A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another,
- (a) intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
- (b) intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;
- shall be guilty of an offence.
Section 1(3) provides: - An offence committed under this section by destroying or damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson.
The first offence is the all-purpose general offence whereas s1(2) the aggravated form because, unlike s1(1), it requires proof of a specific intent at the time the actus reus is committed (see concurrence), that life be endangered or there is an obvious risk that life will be endangered. Lord Taylor CJ. in Webster v Warwick [1995] 2 All ER 168 held that whether life was in fact endangered was irrelevant. The test was how was it intended or risked that life would be endangered. Thus, if the defendant drops a large stone from a motorway bridge intending to break the windscreen of a passing car, he or she may be convicted if the jury finds that there was an intent to shower the driver or passengers with broken glass and that, as a result, control could be lost, thereby endangering life. In the criminal law, intention is one of the three general classes of mens rea necessary to constitute a conventional as opposed to strict liability crime. ...
Actus reus is the action (or inaction, in the case of criminal negligence and similar crimes which are sometimes called acts of omission) which, in combination with the mens rea (guilty mind), produces criminal liability in common law based criminal law jurisdictions such as the United States, United Kingdom. ...
Concurrence or Simultaneity is a legal term, from Western jurisprudence, referring to the simultaneous occurrence of actus reus (bad action) and mens rea (bad mind), which must be present for a crime to have occurred; except in crimes of strict liability. ...
This article may be confusing for some readers, and should be edited to enhance clarity. ...
Elements of the offences
Damage The word "damage" is not defined in the Act, leaving flexibility to the courts. Damage need not be permanent but must affect the value of the property, so what constitutes damage is a matter of fact and degree using a common sense standard. Note that s3(6) Computer Misuse Act 1990, restricts damage to the physical condition of the computer or its storage media. Damage to the software is dealt with under the Act 1990 although it may constitute damage if the computer is rendered inoperable. A court is an official, public forum which a sovereign establishes by lawful authority to adjudicate disputes, and to dispense civil, labour, administrative and criminal justice under the law. ...
The Computer Misuse Act 1990 is an Act of the UK Parliament. ...
Property Property is defined in s10 as wider than the Theft Act 1968 in that it includes land which could be damaged by dumping chemicals on it, but narrower in that it does not include intangibles or a chose in action. The Theft Act 1968 (1968 c. ...
A chose in action is an intangible personal property right recognised and protected by the law, which has no existence apart from the recognition given by the law, or which confers no present possession of a tangible object. ...
Belonging to another An owner can damage his or her own property if, at the same time, it belongs to someone else within the meaning of s10(2), e.g. if a person sets fire to his own house which is subject to a mortgage, he can still be charged under ss1(1) and (3) as the mortgagor will have a proprietary right or interest in the property. A mortgage is a method of using property as security for the payment of a debt. ...
Without lawful excuse The defendant has a lawful excuse when, under s5(2)(a), he or she believes that the person entitled to give consent would consent to the damage or under s5(2)(b), when he or she believes in the immediate necessity to protect property and that that the means adopted are reasonable in all the circumstances. Section 5(3) emphasises that the belief is subjective and must be honestly held to be a defence, although not to the aggravated offence under s1(2)). In Chamberlain v Lindon [1998] 1 WLR 1252 [[1]] Lindon demolished a wall to protect a right of way, honestly believing that it was a reasonable means of avoiding litigation. The phrase Right-of-way is used in two main ways: with reference to the question of which of two or more moving vehicles has priority: for right of way among boats and ships on the water, refer to International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. ...
- it is not necessary to decide whether Lindon’s action was justified as a matter of civil law. For the purpose of the criminal law, what matters is whether Lindon believed that his actions were reasonable, i.e. a subjective test.
Note the controversial Jaggard v Dickinson [1980] 3 All ER 716 which held that even a drunken belief will found the defence even though this allows drunkenness to negate basic intent; and Lloyd v DPP [1992] 1 All ER 982 which holds that a motorist who damages a wheel clamp to free his car, having parked on another's property knowing of the risk of being clamped, does not have a lawful excuse under the Act (see mistake of law). An intoxication defense, in criminal law, is a defense by excuse, via which a defendant argues that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law, because they were intoxicated. ...
Mistake of law is a defense sometimes raised in criminal cases, although rarely with any success. ...
Note that s5(5) confirms that the general excusing defences of infancy, automatism, duress, etc. can be a lawful excuse in addition to the s5(2) situations: A human infant The word Infant derives from the Latin in-fans, meaning unable to speak. ...
Automatism is the practice or theory of the spontaneous production of words (speech or writing), drawing, painting or other creative production, or behavior in general, without conscious self-control or self-censorship. ...
Duress (coercion) (as a term of jurisprudence) is a possible defense, via excuse, by which a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law. ...
- This section shall not be construed as casting doubt on any defence recognised by law as a defence to criminal charges.
Mens rea The mens rea of all the offences is direct or oblique intention, or subjective recklessness as defined by the House of Lords in R v G [2003] 4 All ER 765. Bingham LJ. stated that a person acts 'recklessly' with respect to: The mens rea is the Latin term for guilty mind used in the criminal law. ...
In the criminal law, recklessness (sometimes also termed wilful blindness) is one of the three possible classes of mental state constituting mens rea (the Latin for guilty mind). To commit an offence of ordinary as opposed to strict liability, the prosecution must be able to prove both an actus reus...
This article is about the British House of Lords. ...
- (i) a circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it exists or will exist;
- (ii) a result when he is aware of a risk that it will occur; and it is, in the circumstances known to him, unreasonable to take the risk.
Threat to destroy or damage property Section 2 of the Act creates two offences: With the intention that another will fear it would be carried out, threatening to destroy or damage: - property belonging to the person threatened or a third person; or
- the defendant's own property in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life of the person threatened or a third person.
If such threats occur in a public place, a charge under s4 Public Order Act 1986 might be more appropriate given that s8 Act 1986 confirms that violence includes violence towards property.
Possessing anything with intent to destroy or damage property The offence under s3 provides: - A person who has anything in his custody or under his control intending without lawful excuse to use it or cause or permit another to use it
- (a) to destroy or damage any property belonging to some other person; or
- (b) to destroy or damage his own or the user's property in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life of some other person
- shall be guilty of an offence.
This will be an appropriate charge where the evidence falls short of an attempt to destroy or damage provided the necessary specific intent can be established, e.g. when a defendant is stopped with petrol and matches before a fire has been started. The s3(a) requires damage to property belonging to another, whereas the aggravated offence under s3(b) includes the defendant's own property or the property of the user. The crime of attempt occurs when a person does an act amounting to more than mere preparation for a criminal offense, with specific intent to commit a crime, if that act tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended. ...
Racially aggravated criminal damage Section 30 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 creates an offence of racially and religiously aggravated criminal damage based on s1(1) Act 1971. |
Feeds |
Contact