Section 14 of the 1968 Act expressly provides that theft or theft by post during transit through the postal territory of the United Kingdom in England and Wales may be prosecuted even if the offence took place outside the jurisdiction. When force or threats of violence are used to cause theft inside the building, prosecutors should normally charge robbery to account for the seriousness of the offence and to give the court appropriate powers of punishment. See «Robbery» above. If the aggravating circumstances relate to damage (in points (c) or (d)), the offence will be treated as a summary offence for the purposes of the award procedure if the value of the damage is less than the corresponding amount (see section 22 and Schedule 2 of the Courts of First Instance Act 1980). Although this summarily exploits a lower aggravated TWOC, the summary limitation period provided for in section 127 of the Courts of First Instance Act 1980 will not apply because the offence remains for any purpose other than two-way assignment and proceedings can therefore be initiated at any time. If the defendant is referred to the Crown Court, any related twoc charge aggravated by low-value damage may still be included in the indictment under section 40(3)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. Add a severe collapse to one of your lists below or create a new one. Subsection 8(1) of the 1968 Act defines robbery as follows: As noted above, in order to prove the crime of aggravated burglary, prosecutors must determine that the defendant had the assault weapon with him or her or had it at the time of the burglary. In most cases, the phrase «with them» means that the defendant was carrying the weapon.
However, in R v. Kelt (1977), many people entered a building for criminal purposes while the defendant remained outside, where he was in possession of a scaffolding pipe used to break a window. It was found that since the defendant had not entered the building, he was guilty only of burglary and not of serious burglary. If a defendant is found in possession of property that can be proven to have been recently stolen, jurors may, in the absence of a credible explanation, use common sense to conclude that the defendant is guilty of theft or manipulation of property (including theft in connection with robbery or burglary). The courts have repeatedly emphasized that «recent possession» is nothing more than the application of common sense and is not a legal doctrine as such. Article 6 contains guidance on what may be considered to fall within the scope of the intention to deprive permanently, but there is no exhaustive definition of the term, which is a question of fact for the court. In R v. Kelly (1993) 97 Cr App R 245, the Court of Appeal held that if D used a screwdriver (which he had taken with him to enter a property) to attack the occupant who had caught him during the break-in, the fact that it had been used «in the heat of battle» did not constitute a defence against section 10. In this regard, the definition of a «punitive weapon» is different from that used in the PCA. According to the PCA, an article that is not offensive in itself does not become offensive simply because it is used offensively, if the intention to use it in that way was formed only immediately before its use.
Prosecutors considering an aggravated burglary charge should be aware of Kelly`s broader definition of «punitive weapon.» What an «apartment» is, in any case, will be a matter of fact. There is no complete definition in the 1968 Act, although subsection 9(4) provides that a manned vehicle or vessel must be an apartment for the purposes of the section. Gross LJ, who promulgated the Administrative Court`s judgment in R v Hudson [2017} EWCH 841 (Admin), noted that it was for the de facto court to determine this, but stated: «Overall, the more habitable a building is, the more likely if other things are identical, it is likely to be an `apartment` within the meaning of Section 9(3)(a) of the Act. I wouldn`t go beyond that. In order for the criminal offence of serious burglary to be proved, the criminal offence of burglary must first be proved.