Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Steal your own proerty?
11 Answers
This is a problem im having in preparation for an exam.
Mary accidentally takes the wrong suitcase home from the airport. The suitcase belongs to John, who realises that his suitcase is missing and contacts the airline. The airline tell him that they know who has his suitcase but cannont collect it for him until next week. John decides to collect it himself.
He calls to Mary's house but when he arrives Mary, who does not know he is coming and has had no contact with John, is not there. The front door is sitting open and there is broken glass on the ground inside and outside the house. It has only just been burgled by Paul, who has since fled the scene. John is obviously unaware of this.
John looks into the house and sees his suitcase in the hall. He steps in and having checked that the suitcase is his, he takes it and leaves, cutting his foot badly on the way out.
My main question is is this theft. And if not, is there anything else he could be prosecuted for?
Mary accidentally takes the wrong suitcase home from the airport. The suitcase belongs to John, who realises that his suitcase is missing and contacts the airline. The airline tell him that they know who has his suitcase but cannont collect it for him until next week. John decides to collect it himself.
He calls to Mary's house but when he arrives Mary, who does not know he is coming and has had no contact with John, is not there. The front door is sitting open and there is broken glass on the ground inside and outside the house. It has only just been burgled by Paul, who has since fled the scene. John is obviously unaware of this.
John looks into the house and sees his suitcase in the hall. He steps in and having checked that the suitcase is his, he takes it and leaves, cutting his foot badly on the way out.
My main question is is this theft. And if not, is there anything else he could be prosecuted for?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fabtasticbob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Well he COULD be [wrongly] prosecuted (and quite possibly convicted for) criminal damage to the door ad/or burglary (which only requires 'breaking and entering' to take place, even if nothing is taken). Such a prosecution would be based upon DNA evidence from his blood and the false assumption that he had broken into the property.
However if you're simply asking whether he's actually committed any offence, the answer is 'No'. Anyone can lawfully enter another person's property if they don't need to force entry to do so; trespass is only a civil matter, not a criminal one. (There are certain exceptions to that, such as a trespass on railway property, but they're not relevant here).
John certainly hasn't committed theft, since the definition of theft is thus:
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it".
The appropriation of the bag is not 'dishonest' because the law states:
"A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest—
(a)if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person"
Further, the property is not "belonging to another".
http://www.legislatio...g/definition-of-theft
Chris
However if you're simply asking whether he's actually committed any offence, the answer is 'No'. Anyone can lawfully enter another person's property if they don't need to force entry to do so; trespass is only a civil matter, not a criminal one. (There are certain exceptions to that, such as a trespass on railway property, but they're not relevant here).
John certainly hasn't committed theft, since the definition of theft is thus:
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it".
The appropriation of the bag is not 'dishonest' because the law states:
"A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest—
(a)if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person"
Further, the property is not "belonging to another".
http://www.legislatio...g/definition-of-theft
Chris
Thanks. The reason I was having doubts was that I was thinking that they could maybe wrangle dishonesty from the trespass. And I was also under the impression that it was possible to steal your own property if it was in the "control or possession of others"
http://e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Turner.php
Although maybe the fact that the case above involved lack of payment makes it different?
http://e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Turner.php
Although maybe the fact that the case above involved lack of payment makes it different?
Your question was whether this is theft. The definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968 is "the dishonest appropriation of property BELONGING TO ANOTHER with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". The property taken belongs to him, so no technically theft by definition. i don't understand the comment about cutting his foot or how this is relevant....
If you are preparing for an exam though they are not looking for a simple answer like yes it is/no it isn't theft. What level are you studying at?
You need to go through the various elements of the theft act (and any other appropriate legislation) as separate legal elements in their own right and relevant case law as appropriate then apply to the facts.
You need to go through the various elements of the theft act (and any other appropriate legislation) as separate legal elements in their own right and relevant case law as appropriate then apply to the facts.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.