Discuss Alan(TM)s possible criminal liability arising out of the incidents at the building site

Authors Avatar

Jusna Begum – FE02

January 2005: 2 (A) Discuss Eric’s criminal liability for property offences arising out of the party at Fred’s house. (25 marks)

Eric could be found guilty of burglary under the Theft Act 1968 of section 9. A person is guilty of burglary if: a) he enters any building or part of a building as a trespasser and with intent to commit theft, inflict grievous bodily harm, rape or do unlawful damage therein; or b) having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser he steals or attempts to steal anything or that part of it, or inflicts or attempts to inflict on any person therein any grievous bodily harm. From looking at Eric’s situation he has been a trespasser, (s9.1b) as he’s just a guest and has exceeded his limit to entry, that he had been given permission for. Having helped himself upstairs and then committing criminal damage is another offence of ulterior.

Join now!

The mens rea of burglary is the intention or recklessness to being a trespasser and intention to commit an ulterior offence. Eric fulfils the mens rea of burglary as he had the intention to go beyond the permission given to him, when he decided to go upstairs to the bedroom to destroy the presents. The ulterior offence which he has committed is criminal damage and GBH.

The two factors which must be proved in burglary are that the defendant must enter a building or part of a building and he must be a trespasser. To prove trespass, the defendant ...

This is a preview of the whole essay