Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

(THEFT :moneybag:, ROBBERY :gun:, BURGLURY 🦝) - Coggle Diagram

- - - - R v MORRIS [1983] Merely touching someone's property can amount of an offence of theft :label:
      - R v HINKS [1993] It can amount to an appropriation if the property was acquired through a gift :gift:
      - MPC v LAWRENCE [1971] Can still be found guilty of theft, even if the victim had consented to the appropriation.
    - - R v TURNER [1971] It can be a theft if it's done through a service or property belonging to yourself :car:
  - - - R v VELYMUL [1989] Looks at the defendant's deprivation if the defendant had the intention to permanently deprive.
      - R v WEBSTER [2006] Defendant's can be found guilty if a person has a proprietary interest :sports_medal:
    - - R v GHOSH [1982] Provides a test for the jury whether the defendant was dishonest :silhouettes:
  - - - OXFORD V MOSS [1979] Acquiring information does not amount to appropriation as it's intangible property :newspaper:
- - - - R v COLLINS [1973] There MUST be a substantial and effective entry with knowledge or being reckless as to being a trespasser :leaves:
    - - S v LEATHLEY [1979] Confirmed that a freezer can amount to being a building if there is no precedent to say otherwise 🥶
        
        STEVENS V GOURLEY [1859] Building was a "Structure of considerable size and intended to be permanently if at least endured considerably." :derelict_house_building:
    - - R v BROWN [1985] Entry can still be effective if the defendants body was not fully within the building