attempts cases Flashcards
White
Defendant poisoned his mother’s milk. She died of a heart attack.
The case established the “but for” test. Would the result have occurred but for the actions of the defendant? If the answer is yes, the defendant is not liable. D was not liable for murder, but for attempts
Boyle and Boyle
Convicted of burglary as they were found outside a door which locks had been tampered with and one of the hinges had been broken.
Act was more than merely preparatory as they tampered with the locks. Their burglary conviction was upheld. Had done part of a series of acts. Sufficient evidence for an attempt.
R v Jones
D tried to shoot V. V threw away the fun. Safety catch was on the gun. D charged with attempted murder.
D argued that he still had more things to do before his actions became more than mere prep. Sufficient evidence for an attempt.
Millard and Vernon
Charged with attempted criminal damage. At a football ground and persistently pushed against the wooden fence.
Subjective recklessness insufficient to constitute intent in an attempt to cause criminal damage. Actions not more than mere prep.
Tosti and White
Defendants were convicted of attempted burglary on a farm. Were the actions more than mere prep?
It was held by the court of appeal, dismissing the appeal, that the short question was whether it could be said that the defendants, in providing themselves with oxygen cutting equipment, driving to the scene, concealing the equipment in a hedge, approaching the door of the barn and bending down to examine how best to go about the job of breaking into the barn, had committed acts which were more than mere prep.
Gullefer
D convicted of theft from the bet he made which he lost.
He had not gone beyond mere prep. It remained for him to go to the bookmaker and demand his money.
Has D embarked upon the crime proper?
Geddes
D was in school with a rucksack. In the rucksack was tape, rope and a knife.
Has D’s actions moved from planning and preparation to execution and implementation?
Actions not more than mere prep as did not approach a child.
Mohan
D drove his car and almost hit a police officer.
Men’s rea for attempted offence was satisfied. Only intention would suffice and actus reus was not needed.
Acts were not more than mere prep.
Attorney General’s Reference
Four defendants threw a petrol bomb from a moving car, which hit a wall nearby and six men. Charged with attempted aggravated arson.
Shivpuri
D was smuggling what he thought was drugs.
Actions more than mere prep as he had the intention for the full offence even though this is physically impossible.
Easom
D was in a cinema. Woman’s bag was on the floor. He looked through it but didn’t take anything.
Conditional intent. Actions more than mere prep.
Anderton v Ryan
D was found in possession of video recorder she believed was stolen. No evidence it was stolen, convicted of attempting to handle stolen goods.
Conviction quashed on the grounds that she could not be guilty of attempting to handle stolen goods unless such property was shown to have existed.
Eagleton
D was convicted of attempting to obtain money by false pretences.
Widdowson
D made dishonest representations in a document which might at a layer date have led to a hire purchase agreement.
Giving false name on hire purchase credit inquiry form no offence. Not more than mere prep.
Campbell
D was outside of a post office and arrested due to police being informed of a potential robbery.
Actions mere prep as he did not enter the post office.
