Criminal law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Criminal law - Essay Example When Roxy arrived home her neighbour, Trisha invited her in for a cup of tea. While she was there, she noticed Trisha’s new Rolex watch and asked Trisha if she could borrow it to wear to an appointment she had later on that day as she wanted to impress the person she was meeting. Trisha refused as she was worried that Roxy might lose it. When Trisha was not looking, Roxy took the watch intending to return it that evening after her appointment. Her appointment ended earlier than she expected, however, an on her way home she noticed that the pawnshop was still open. As she was short of money, she decided to pawn the watch and redeem it the following day when she received her wages. She would return it to Trisha when she had redeemed it. Consider the criminal liability, if any, of Roxy. Basic Structure Examination of the actus reus of theft, then mens rea, then conclude. Introduction: s1. Then, analyse the Actus Reus in s3(1), s4(1), s5(1). s3(1), s4(1), s5(1) need analyse too. . .. The actus reus for theft is where a person appropriates property belonging to another. The mens rea element of the offence is committed when it can be shown that the property was obtained dishonestly with the intention of permanently depriving the owner any rights over the property. This is listed in s1 TA 1968. There is no requirement that the intention of the person stealing the item is doing so with the intention of making a gain from taking the item1. The court will not consider the appropriation to be dishonest if the person taking the item can show that they believed that had the right to take the item2. This would also be the case if the person taking the item believed that the owner of the property would give their consent to take the item3. Appropriation has been defined under s3(1) of the 1968 Act, which makes it clear that if the person taking the item assumes the rights of an owner over the property this will amount to appropriation4. Under s4(1) property has been defined as ‘money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property’. Land can only be stolen in certain circumstances, but there is no need to discuss this in the case of Roxy. Possession of property is defined as ‘belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having any proprietary right or interest5’ in the property. Even if the person taking the item does not intend to permanently deprive the owner ownership of the property, such intention can be inferred if the person taking the item treats the item as their own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights6. Having considered how the Theft Act defines theft it is now possible to consider the actions of Roxy in each of the above situations and determine ant