Handling Stolen Goods in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R v Robertson
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 11 Junio 1987

    Section 74 by using the words "any issue in those proceedings" does not seek to limit the word "issue" to the restricted meaning indicated above. Section 74 by using the words "any issue in those proceedings" does not seek to limit the word "issue" to the restricted meaning indicated above. Section 74 by using the words "any issue in those proceedings" does not seek to limit the word "issue" to the restricted meaning indicated above.

  • R v Hall (Edward Leonard)
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 11 Marzo 1985

    Either of those two states of mind is enough to satisfy the words of the statute. Either of those two states of mind is enough to satisfy the words of the statute. A man may be said to know that goods are stolen when he is told by someone with first hand knowledge (someone such as the thief or the burglar) that such is the case. A man may be said to know that goods are stolen when he is told by someone with first hand knowledge (someone such as the thief or the burglar) that such is the case.

  • R (Wilkinson) v DPP
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 22 Junio 2006

    The question of who should be charged and with what offence is essentially one for the Crown Prosecution Service. Notwithstanding the obvious wider intention of the 2002 legislation it cannot be said that the conduct sought to be attributed to the claimant does not fall within section 329.

  • R v Blackshaw
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 18 Octubre 2011

    In cases like these, a line needs to be drawn between the offences which arose from and were directly connected with the disorder (which is an aggravating feature in itself) and those which were intrinsic to the disorder (an even more aggravating feature). Rather each represents opportunistic involvement after the burglaries had occurred, and although in close proximity to the scenes of disorder, the appellants did not participate or contribute to them.

  • R v Saik
    • House of Lords
    • 03 Mayo 2006

    I should say at this stage that the problem arising here is not one that arises in the context of handling offences. Handling is committed by those who know or believe that the goods are stolen. True, the offence is not committed if the goods, albeit believed stolen, in fact prove not to be.

  • R v Moys
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 18 Mayo 1984

    It is not every Crown Court which is equipped with the necessary reports enabling a Judge at the moment to go and look up the cases referred to in that paragraph.

  • R v Richard Dean BARNETT
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 07 Febrero 2002

    In the present case, the trial judge laid the relevant facts before the jury. The jury had, as the judge reminded them, the full transcript of the interview and they could see the explanation, which the defendant gave in interview for his original untrue story about walking the dog. The judge also reminded the jury of the explanation which the appellant had given in evidence for his original untrue story about walking the dog. In evidence the appellant had said that that story was a joke.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT