"Dave {Reply Address in.sig}" wrote in message
news:10702639.9MBUG26Uge@robinton.llondel.org...
> In message , Janitor of
> Lunacy wrote:
>
>>
>> "next generation" wrote in message
>> news:24b8e35f-d5a2-4858-beaf-127f385f5d46@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> for theft in law the police have to prove that you:
>>> -dishonestly
>>> -appropriate
>>> -property
>>> -belonging to another
>>> -intenting to deprive the other
>>>
>>> borrowing amounts to taking for his/her own use and is the same as
>>> outright taking, regardless of whether you planned to return it.
>>
>> It only amounts to an outright taking if, when returned, the bicycle has
>> lost what is called "its virtue"- e.g. taking a season ticket, using it
>> up, and returning the actual piece of card itself still amounts to theft
>> of the season ticket, because when returned it is useless. The same
>> cannot
>> be said of a bicycle, if it's still a bicycle when it is returned.
>
> That's why the "taking a car without authority" offence was introduced -
> taking a car, denting it up a bit but otherwise letting the owner recover
> it and get it fixed isn't theft. If it get written off then it becomes
> theft because the owner has effectively been deprived of the vehicle.
As long as that was the intent of the defendant. If it wasn't, not theft.
|