Flashcards in Handling Stolen Goods Deck (13):
Hawes v Edwards
"Receiving" for the offence of handling stolen goods may be satisfied where the goods are located at a place over which D has control with AN INTENT TO POSSESS THE GOODS (this mental element being crucial)
"Receiving" may be constituted by control where the good is in the custody of a servant acting under D’s direction through whom D exercises control over the goods, if D has AUTHORISED OR INSTRUCTED the servant to receive those goods.
If D is to be charged with handling stolen goods by "arranging to receive" the theft must predate the arrangement such that D knows or believes the goods are stolen property at the time of arrangement, otherwise the charge is conspiracy
Merely using the stolen goods does not qualify as "assisting" for purposes of handling stolen goods.
Passive acquiescence is NOT sufficient to constitute "assisting" even if D is benefiting from someone else’s handling
An omission to disclose the presence of stolen goods in the absence of a duty to disclose is NOT sufficient to constitute assisting.
The assistance need not be successful in its object
D may be charged with alternative counts of theft and handling if he handles the goods after the initial theft but it cannot be shown he was responsible for the initial theft.
Walters v Lunt
If the only person who could have stolen the good lacks criminal capacity there is no theft and so handling the property cannot be an offence, though it may be an attempt.
D must either be shown to be aware of the theft or believe the goods are stolen
If D is shown to possess property that was recently stolen, this is sufficient evidence to justify a finding that D is either a thief or dishonest receiver where there is no credible explanation as to how D innocently came by the property, with "recent" depending on the circumstances
If D intends to hand it over to the police or true owner immediately he cannot be guilty of handling