Topic 4 - Property offences - Criminal Damage

Question 1

What is the maximum sentence for basic criminal damage under the Criminal Damage Act 1971?

Answer 1

Ten years’ imprisonment

Question 2

What are the five parts of the basic criminal damage offence?

Answer 2

• Destroy or damage
• Property
• Belonging to another
• Without lawful excuse
• Intention or recklessness as to the damage or destruction of property belonging to another

Question 3

How does the Criminal Damage Act 1971 define ‘destroy’?

Answer 3

‘Destroy’ means that following D’s actions, the property ceases to exist

Question 4

In Hardman v Chief Constable of Avon [1986], why was painting silhouettes on a pavement considered damage?

Answer 4

Damage need not be permanent; time, effort, and money were spent to restore the pavement

Question 5

What did the court decide in A (a juvenile) v R [1978] regarding spitting on a policeman’s raincoat?

Answer 5

Spitting was not considered criminal damage as it could be wiped away without a mark

Question 6

What constitutes property under the Criminal Damage Act 1971?

Answer 6

• Property of a tangible nature
• Includes real or personal property
• Includes money and wild creatures that have been tamed or are ordinarily kept in captivity

Question 7

In R v Whitely (1991), what did the court rule about information regarding property?

Answer 7

Information does not fall within the definition of ‘property’ in the CDA 1971

Question 8

What does Section 10(2) of the CDA 1971 state about property ownership?

Answer 8

Property can belong to more than one person, including those with custody, control, or a proprietary right

Question 9

What is the mens rea for basic criminal damage?

Answer 9

Intention or recklessness as to the destruction or damage of property belonging to another

Question 10

What must the prosecution prove for reckless criminal damage according to R v G [2003]?

Answer 10

• The accused was subjectively aware of a risk
• It was objectively unreasonable to take that risk

Question 11

What was the outcome of R v Smith [1974] regarding mistaken belief in property ownership?

Answer 11

Ignorance of civil law can prevent liability if the belief that the property belongs to oneself is honestly held

Question 12

What is the definition of arson under the Criminal Damage Act 1971?

Answer 12

Arson is criminal damage by fire, however slight

Question 13

What are the actus reus components of basic arson?

Answer 13

• Destroy or damage by fire
• Property
• Belonging to another
• Without lawful excuse

Question 14

What are the two lawful excuse defences in Section 5(2) of the CDA 1971?

Answer 14

• Section 5(2)(a): D believes the owner would have consented to the damage
• Section 5(2)(b): D acts to protect their or another’s property

Question 15

In Jaggard v Dickinson [1980], what was the court’s ruling regarding voluntary intoxication and mistaken belief?

Answer 15

The court held that the belief need not be reasonable and that intoxication does not negate the defence

Question 16

Can a defendant’s motive affect their defence under Section 5(2)(a) of the CDA 1971?

Answer 16

No, the defendant’s motive is irrelevant as long as they honestly believe the owner would have consented

Question 17

What was the ruling in R v Denton [1982] concerning a belief in consent for arson?

Answer 17

The court quashed the conviction as he was entitled to the defence under CDA 1971, s 5(2)(a)

Question 18

What limits were placed on the defence of lawful excuse as seen in Blake v DPP [1993]?

Answer 18

A belief that God consented to the damage is not a lawful excuse under English law

Question 19

What does Section 5(2)(b) of the CDA 1971 state about acting to protect property?

Answer 19

It applies when the defendant believes the property is in immediate need of protection

Question 20

What must a defendant believe for the section 5(2)(b) defence?

Answer 20

The defendant must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection and that the means of protection adopted are reasonable

This is based on section 5(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971.

Question 21

What is the significance of the case R v Baker & Wilkins in relation to protecting property?

Answer 21

The defendant must act to protect property

This establishes a requirement for the section 5(2)(b) defence.

Question 22

What does section 5(3) of the CDA 1971 state regarding belief?

Answer 22

It is immaterial whether a belief is justified or not if it is honestly held

This provision emphasizes the subjective nature of the belief held by the defendant.

Question 23

What does the court require regarding the damage caused by the defendant as per R v Hunt?

Answer 23

The damage must be objectively capable of protecting the property

This introduces an objective element to the defence under section 5(2)(b).

Question 24

What was the outcome of Johnson v DPP regarding the belief of immediate need for protection?

Answer 24

The Queen’s Bench Division upheld his conviction on the grounds that he did not believe his property was in immediate need of protection.

Question 25

What does section 5(5) of the CDA 1971 preserve?

Answer 25

The availability of general defences to criminal offences such as self-defence and duress.

Question 26

What are the actus reus elements of aggravated criminal damage under section 1(2) of the CDA 1971?

Answer 26

* Destroy or damage property * By fire

Question 27

What is the mens rea for aggravated criminal damage as per section 1(2)(a) of the CDA 1971?

Answer 27

Intention or recklessness as to the destruction or damage of property by fire.

Question 28

In R v Sangha, what was the key issue regarding endangerment of life?

Answer 28

Whether the accused intended or was reckless as to whether life might have been endangered, not whether life was actually endangered.

Question 29

What was the outcome of R v Dudley regarding the intent to endanger life?

Answer 29

The Court of Appeal disagreed that the extent of actual damage was relevant; it focused on the intent or recklessness behind the action.

Question 30

In R v Steer, why did the court rule that the actions did not constitute an offence under the CDA 1971?

Answer 30

There had to be a causal link between the damage to property and the danger to life.

Question 31

What distinguishes the risk to life in cases of fire damage according to Lord Bridge of Harwich?

Answer 31

The risk to life arises from the ensuing conflagration caused by the property being set on fire.

Question 32

What was the ruling in R v Webster regarding endangerment of life?

Answer 32

The court ruled that intent to endanger life must be based on the outcome of falling debris from the damaged property.