Robbery

• which section of what legislation defines robbery?

  Section 8 ( 1 ) of the theft act 1968
• what is the significance of Section 8 ( 1 ) of the theft act 1968?

  It defines robbery
• According to Section 8 ( 1 ) of the theft act 1968, what is the definition of robbery?

  It is where someone steals and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being subjected to force
• what is the actus reus of robbery?

  It is committed through the D having the actus reus of theft plus use of threats of violence
• What is the men's rea of robbery?

  The mens rea includes the mens rea of theft plusintention in relation to the use or threat of force in order to steal.
• what is the first element of the actus reus of robbery?

  There must be a completed theft
• what is the significance of the case of r v waters?

  It is an example of an incomplete theft
• which case is an example of an incomplete theft?

  r v Waters
• what is the significance of the case of Corcoran v Anderson?

  it is an example of a completed theft
• what case is an example of a completed theft?

  Corcoran v Anderson
• what is the second element of the actus reus of robbery?

  There must be force, or the threat of force
• What is the significance of the case of r v Dawson and James?

  It was decided that force is an ordinary word and that the jury should decide if it has been used.
• In which case was it decided that force is an ordinary word and that the jury should decide if it has been used?

  r v Dawson and James
• what is the significance of the case of r v clouden?

  It gives an example of force being used.
• which case gives an example of force being use?

  r v clouden
• Which case gives an example of the defendant not committing a robbery because no force was used?

  P v DPP
• what is the significance of the case of P v DPP?

  it gives an example of the defendant not committing a robbery because no force was used
• what is the significance of the case of B and R v DPP?

  It shows how the victim doesn't need to feel threatened, the threat of force from the defendant is enough.
• Which case shows how the victim doesn't need to feel threatened, the threat of force from the defendant is enough?

  B and R v DPP
• what is the significance of the case of r v Hale?

  It confirms that the force used, or threat of force needs to take place before the theft
• which case confirms that the force used, or threat of force needs to take place before the theft

  R v Hale
• The force must be used in order to help with the theft. If the force is used for a different purpose, then this will not be robbery
• For the sake of robbery, what is the mens rea of theft?

  The defendant was dishonest in their actions, and they had intention to deprive the victim of their goods permanently.