6/1/17 Criminal Law Davy Baby
Robbery and Burglary
Robbery
s8 TA 1968: ‘A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of
doing so and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in
fear of then and there subjected to force’ (maximum sentence – life imprisonment)
Theft must be established: unless all elements of theft established, can be no robbery
Theft and robbery policy considerations
Does necessity of proving theft make it too difficult to prosecute robbery?
Should robbery be disconnected from theft to make it easier to prosecute?
Or is it right that, since robbery is understood to be a form of aggravated theft, then it is important
that all of the elements of theft are satisfied before robbery is possible?
D’s use of force
How much force is sufficient for robbery?
Hale (1978)
D put hand over V’s mouth in order to stop shouting for help
Dawson (1976)
D1 pushed and jostled with V, which made V fall over. D2 took wallet.
Held: CA requires that force be significant (rather than substantial)
RP v CPP [2013]
D pulled cigarette from V’s fingers.
Held: not force
Mens rea: Intention (+ seeking to put anyone in fear..)
1) D must use force or threats ‘in order to’ steal
- All cases require prosecution to establish that force or threats were used ‘in order’ to steal
2) If no actual force used, or no actual threats issued, then D’s intention for V to ‘fear’ is key
DPP v R [2007] EWHC 739
11 boys surrounded 1 boy to steal. Victim said wasn’t scared.
Held: ‘there had been every reason to conclude that there had been an implied threat of force’.
Didn’t matter what defendant had achieved, only important thing is what defendant sought to do
R v Tennant [1976] Crim LR 133
Force used or threats on ‘any person’
Force only against person, or will property suffice?
Clouden [1987]
Guy pulled woman’s shopping bag and argued there was no use of force against person.
Held: whether D used force on any person to steal is issue that should be left to the jury
To whom must the force or threats be directed?
Smith v Desmond [1965] AC 960 (HL) (Actual force used)
Held people in bakery so could not stop robbery
Held: Not necessarily property owner
1
Robbery and Burglary
Robbery
s8 TA 1968: ‘A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of
doing so and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in
fear of then and there subjected to force’ (maximum sentence – life imprisonment)
Theft must be established: unless all elements of theft established, can be no robbery
Theft and robbery policy considerations
Does necessity of proving theft make it too difficult to prosecute robbery?
Should robbery be disconnected from theft to make it easier to prosecute?
Or is it right that, since robbery is understood to be a form of aggravated theft, then it is important
that all of the elements of theft are satisfied before robbery is possible?
D’s use of force
How much force is sufficient for robbery?
Hale (1978)
D put hand over V’s mouth in order to stop shouting for help
Dawson (1976)
D1 pushed and jostled with V, which made V fall over. D2 took wallet.
Held: CA requires that force be significant (rather than substantial)
RP v CPP [2013]
D pulled cigarette from V’s fingers.
Held: not force
Mens rea: Intention (+ seeking to put anyone in fear..)
1) D must use force or threats ‘in order to’ steal
- All cases require prosecution to establish that force or threats were used ‘in order’ to steal
2) If no actual force used, or no actual threats issued, then D’s intention for V to ‘fear’ is key
DPP v R [2007] EWHC 739
11 boys surrounded 1 boy to steal. Victim said wasn’t scared.
Held: ‘there had been every reason to conclude that there had been an implied threat of force’.
Didn’t matter what defendant had achieved, only important thing is what defendant sought to do
R v Tennant [1976] Crim LR 133
Force used or threats on ‘any person’
Force only against person, or will property suffice?
Clouden [1987]
Guy pulled woman’s shopping bag and argued there was no use of force against person.
Held: whether D used force on any person to steal is issue that should be left to the jury
To whom must the force or threats be directed?
Smith v Desmond [1965] AC 960 (HL) (Actual force used)
Held people in bakery so could not stop robbery
Held: Not necessarily property owner
1
