Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Burglary Offences - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Held: His conviction was upheld. The question had been correctly put to the jury.
  - - - Held: These did not amount to a building.
  - - - The container did constitute a building for the purposes of the Theft Act 1968.
  - - - Held: His conviction was upheld. There was no requirement to have a physical separation. The counter area was clearly out of bounds to the public and thus he was a trespasser in that part of the building.
  - - - Held: The appellants had exceeded their permission by stealing and were thus trespassers.
  - - - His conviction was upheld. The entry need not be substantial provided it is effective.
  - - - Held: His conviction was quashed. It was held that there must be an effective and substantial entry with knowledge or being reckless as to being a trespasser. Consent of the home owner (the girl's parents) was not required it was sufficient that the girl had invited him in.
      - Lord Justice Edmund Davies: "Unless the jury were entirely satisfied that the Appellant made an effective and substantial entry into the bedroom without the complainant doing or saying anything to cause him to believe that she was consenting to his entering it, he ought not to be convicted of the offence charged."
- - - - Mens Rea
        
        The mens rea of 9(1)(a) burglary is simply proof of an intention to commit one of the 3 ulterior offences. Intent to commit theft, GBH or criminal damage.
        PLUS knowledge that they are a trespasser or recklessness (realising the risk and going on to take that risk - Cunningham)
      - Actus Reus
        
        Entry of a building or part of a building with intent to steal, commit GBH or criminal damage.
        Actus reus - entry of a building or part of a building as a trespasser - already explained above
  - - - Mens Rea
        
        Mens Rea for theft or GBH
        PLUS knowledge that they are a trespasser or recklessness (realising the risk and going on to take that risk - Cunningham)
      - Actus Reus
        
        A person is guilty of burglary is having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser he steals or attempts to steal or inflicts GBH or attempts to inflict GBH.
        Basics of theft - s.1 Theft Act 1968 AR – appropriation (s.3) of property (s.4) belonging to another (s.5) (add a few with your application). MR - dishonesty - negative definition s.2 plus Ivey v Genting Test where appropriate and intent to permanently deprive the other of the property (s.6).
        If GBH has occurred just say that burglary only requires GBH contrary to s.20 OAPA 1861 (Jenkins). Provided the injuries are serious, they will amount to GBH. The mens rea for section 20 must be established - that the D intended (aim or purpose) to cause some harm or that he was at least reckless with regards to whether some harm might occur (realised risk + still went ahead to take that risk).