Recent Book: The Daily Bread: The Theft Acts 1968 and 1978
| Date | 01 July 1979 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X7905200317 |
| Published date | 01 July 1979 |
| Author | Portia |
| Subject Matter | Recent Book |
THE
DAILY
BREAD
EDWARDGRIEw
The Theft Acts 1968
and
1978. (Third Edition)
Sweet and Maxwell' Hardback £9.25 Paperback £6.25
Anyone who has been involved in the
operation
of the Theft Act 1968 is only
too well aware of the difficulties which
have arisen during the last few years.
Many will have greatly appreciated the
assistance offered by Professor Griew in
the previous editions of this
book,
particularly when dealing with the
notoriously inadequate section 16.
The
Theft Act 1978 has repealed
Section 16 (2) (a) of the 1968 Act and
replaced it with the following three
offences:
i)the
obtaining
of services by deception
ii)the evasion of liability by deception
iii)the making off without payment.
Section (iii) is a particularly interesting
section not only because it creates a new
offence
but
because it uses what might be
called somewhat
"un-Parliamentary"
language. Any
attempt
to simplify the
words of a statute is to be commended.
However, the following does seem to-go a
little far:
"a person who, knowing
that
payment on the spot for
any
goods
supplied or services
done
is required
or expected from him dishonestly
makes
off
without having paid .
and with intent to avoid payment .
shall be guilty of an offence."
It
will be interesting to see the judicial
interpretations of
"on
the spot" and
"making
off'.
Unfortunately, as a result of the slow
passage of the 1978 Act
through
Parliament, Professor Griew
W
forced
to revise his
book
on the basis
that
the
Bill would not receive the necessary
support. The new Act, therefore, has
been dealt with in an Appendix to the
third edition. However, even in this
comparatively brief
commentary
on the
new offences, the professor has provided
a very useful exposition of the law
and,
not surprisingly, has foreseen several of
the problems and inconsistencies which
may arise in the future.
One such inconsistencyseemsto follow
from the fact
that
sections
(ii)
and (iii)
apply only to liabilities and transactions
which are legally enforceable whereas
section (i) has no such restriction. Thus,
it
appears
that
a man may be convicted
under section (i) if he obtains the services
of a prostitute without intending to pay
her from the outset, yet he
cannot
be
convicted under sections (ii) or (iii) if he
subsequently evades his liability to pay
her or makes off without paying her!
Obviously, the complexities of the
Theft Act 1978 are too great to consider
in detail here
and,
as Professor Griew
points out there are still
many
complications
arising
from
the
unrepealed sections of the 1968 Act. This
is a difficult part of the criminal law
which is frequently changing. Thus, one
is extremely grateful to Professor Griew
for his admirable
commentary
on and
criticism of the present law of theft. As
the publishers
"blurb"
suggests, this is a
"concise and invaluable
companion"
for
all with an interest in this area ,of the
criminal law.
PORTIA
MAN'S
BEST
FRIEND
CLIFFORD
R.
STANLEY:
Deferred Value
Barry Rose (Publishers) Ltd. £2.20
This
book
immediately attracted my
attention
for two reasons; firstly the title
and secondly the fine picture on the cover
of an Alsatian at rest. However, the
initial anticipation was not satisfied by
this
rather
over-priced booklet. The idea
of writing
about
working Police dogs and
their history is
both
asound and original
idea,
but
unfortunately Mr. Stanley has
merely scratched the surface.
The first recorded use of a Police dog
in Europe was by the
Ghent
Chief of
Police,
Van
Wesenmael,
who
experimented with three twelve
month
old Flemish Sheepdogs on night
duty
and eventually increased his
'dog
section'
to sixty nine.
It
is interesting to note
that
the dogs were muzzled until released in
pursuit of a fugitive. The
subject
of
muzzling in crowd .situations has been
discussed fairly recently
but
discarded
298
for a
number
of sound practical reasons.
Europe followed quickly on Belgian
heels and by 1907 the principle had
crossed the Atlantic when New York
Police
bought
six dogs to form the basis
of a new
'dog
branch'.
British Chief Constables in the late
1800's had very differing views
about
the
use of dogs for Police work. Cheshire
forbad officers to be accompanied on
their
beats
at
night
and
in
Northumberland,
in 1870, Super-
intendents were instructed to suspend
from
duty
any officer who had a dog in
his possession. Less staid attitudes were
exhibited in Leicester(1879)
and
London
(1893),
but
both
these Forces had dogs
that
were little more
than
untrained
strays with a penchant for the
company
of Policemen. Such animals would
accompany the night
duty
officer on his
July
J'979
To continue reading
Request your trial