back to criminal law       back to home

This page contains two directions:

(i) where having entered as a trespasser the defendant stole; and

(ii) entering as a trespasser with intent to steal. 

Burglary (i - theft)

In this case burglary involves

·       entering a building (such as a flat) as a trespasser  – that is entering without the owner’s permission; and

·       stealing property belonging to another – that means dishonestly taking something with the intention of permanently depriving the owner.

In this case there is no doubt that someone committed a burglary - that a trespasser took ****.

There is also no doubt that D** entered the flat as a trespasser – he admits that and ***his blood was found on the window.  He says he simply entered the flat to sleep there.

The only issue is whether he was involved in taking the ***

So, the key question for you to answer in relation to Count *, having regard to all the evidence and the directions which I give you, is this

Are you sure that D** was involved in taking the ***? 

If the answer is “yes”, the defendant is guilty of Count *.  If the answer is “no”, he is not guilty of Count *.

Burglary (ii – with intent)

 

In this case burglary involves entering a building (such as a ***) as a trespasser with intent to steal therein. 

A trespasser is simply a person who does not have the owner’s permission to enter the building.

It has not been suggested that D*** had the owner’s permission to enter the **, so this is an aspect that you do not have to consider.

The only issue is whether he intended to steal.

In this case, stealing means dishonestly appropriating (i.e. taking) property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.  That includes items, such as ***. 

The prosecution do not have to prove that D*** actually stole anything, simply that at the time that he entered the ***, he intended to steal something which was inside it.  The prosecution do not have to prove what it was that he intended to steal, simply that he intended to steal something.

How do the prosecution prove intention? Criminals very rarely tell anyone that they intend to commit offences.  So, the answer to the question is that you can infer an intention from the surrounding circumstances.

The key question for you to answer in relation to Count 1, having regard to all the evidence and the directions which I give you, is this

When D** entered the ***, did he intend to steal something?

If you are sure that the answer is “yes”, he is guilty.  If the answer may be “no”, he is not guilty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

back to criminal law       back to home