Passports: HOME | EUROPE | AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA and OCEANIA | ASIA | AFRICA | OTHER DOCUMENTS
National Anthems:[ www.national-anthems.net ] ++
Travel:[ Europe ] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ more ]
[ Australia legal ] [ U.K. legal ] [ U.S. visa ] [ Immigration ] [ Marriage based U.S visa ]



Subject: Re: Riding someone elses bike. Theft? Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:41:56 +0000

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:02:03 GMT, "Matt" wrote:

>
>"Janitor of Lunacy" wrote in message
>news:gNcGj.84556$M9.39048@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> "next generation" wrote in message
>> news:1007ff65-7519-42e8-a38a-b45494a1730a@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 25, 7:43 pm, "Matt" wrote:
>>>> "Steve Walker" wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:64t24fF2ctehrU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > Matt wrote:
>>>> >> "Bob Robertson" wrote in message
>>>> >>news:Z5cGj.30115$kN5.20925@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
>>>> >>> I saw on one of these police programs a guy was caught on CCTV late
>>>> >>> at night taking an unlocked bicycle and riding it around. When the
>>>> >>> police caught up with him he was a youngish lad probably in college
>>>> >>> who seemed a bit upset that his late night drunken antics was going
>>>> >>> to leave him with his first criminal record.
>>>>
>>>> >>> I was wondering, could he just have argued that he was going to put
>>>> >>> it back where he found it once he finished riding it, hence not
>>>> >>> 'permanently depriving' the owner? He was probably going to keep it
>>>> >>> as a trophy but how would the police know?
>>>>
>>>> >> Apply your theory to a car/any household goods/etc.
>>>>
>>>> >> It was theft
>>>>
>>>> > Not really - that's why we have an offence called TWOC
>>>>
>>>> TWOC can be classed as theft, dependant on it's circumstances and
>>>> dervives
>>>> from the Theft Act 1968
>>>
>>> Correct, Its s12(1) but has a lesser punishment.
>>
>> It is NOT theft because there is no element of "intent to permanently
>> deprive".
>
>How do you know they are not going to permananetly deprive the 'victim'. As
>i said, it depends on the circumstancs. I.e were they going to return it
>safely or stick it in a canal.

For a conviction to be secured, it isn't a case of "how do you know
they weren't going to permanently deprive him", but rather "how do you
know they *were* going to permanently deprive him".
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Don't Take Life Seriously, It Is Not Permanent.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom