Recent Judicial Decisions
| Author | John Wood |
| Published date | 01 January 1980 |
| Date | 01 January 1980 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X8005300112 |
PROFESSOR SIR JOHN WOOD, C.B.E., LL.M.,
The University
of
Sheffield.
Legal Correspondent
of
the
POLICE
JOURNAL
RECENT
JUDICIAL
DECISIONS
FIRE, FIRE
R. v. Stephenson [1979] 3 W.L.R.193Court of Appeal
The appellant hadbeen foundguilty ona count of arson and had
pleaded guilty to burglary. He appealed against the conviction for
arson.The facts aresimple. Stephenson went to a large stack of
straw,in a field and tried to sleep ina hollow in the stack.
It
was too
coldsohemade afire oftwigs andstrawinsidethehollow. Not
surprisinglythewhole stacktookfire causing damagevaluedat
about £5,500. Onbeing interviewed bythe police shortlyafterwards,
Stephenson said that thefirehadbeencausedby his smokinga
cigarette.Laterhe toldabout the firehe had made.He ran away
when the stackwent up in flames.
It
was, he said, anaccident.
At the trialthe accused did not give evidence. The onlywitness
called for the defencewas a psychiatristwhotestified thatthe accused
had alonghistoryof schizophrenia. That condition he said would
make itquitepossible forthe accusedtoact ashe didwithouttaking
into account the danger of thewhole stackbeing burnt.His foresight
and appreciation of danger would beless than that of a personwho
was mentally normal,
The crimeof arson is definedin theCriminalDamageAct
1971.
S.l
provides that 'Apersonwho withoutlawful excuse
...
damages
any property belonging to another
...
being reckless astowhether
any such property would be
...
damaged' and S.3 that'anoffence
committed under that section by
...
damaging property by fire shall
be charged asarson'. Thecrucialissuein thiscaseis therequired
elementof recklessness. Theappeal was basedupon criticismof the
trial judge's direction to the jury on this point.
Two pointswere made.The firstconcernedthe narrow issue
whether the trial judgehadtakentheformulahe hadused from the
wrong case.He hadused a passagefromR. v. Parker [1973] I
W.L.R.600 whichsaid
'Amanis reckless in thesense requiredwhenhe carriesouta
deliberate act knowing or closing his
mind
to the obviousfactthat
thereissomeriskofdamageresultingfrom- theactbut
nevertheless continuing in the performance of that act'.
This differed fromthe definition in R. v. Briggs (Note)[1977] I
W.L.R.605 in so far as it contained, as anaddition, the words in
italics. These words were said to cloudthe definition set outinBriggs.
January1980 Police Journal73
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting