Show Summary Details
Page of

Answers Section 

Answers Section
Chapter:
Answers Section
Author(s):

Paul Connor

DOI:
10.1093/law/9780198806387.003.0025
Page of

Subscriber: null; date: 15 August 2018

1. Mens Rea (State of Mind) and Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct)

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer C — After the decision in R v G & R [2003] 3 WLR 1060, objective recklessness has been consigned to history. This makes answers A and B incorrect (as B is objective recklessness). Answer D is fabricated.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.1.4

2. Answer A — These facts are very similar to the case of R v Smith [1959] 2 QB 35. It is only in exceptional circumstances that medical treatment will break the chain of causation (R v Jordan (1956) 40 Cr App R 152), making answer C incorrect. Following the ‘but for’ test, the fact that LOVATT received poor treatment and was dropped several times on the way to the hospital will not affect GRICE’s liability, making answers B and D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 1.2.5 to 1.2.6

3. Answer C — Drug dealers are not generally liable for the ultimate deaths of their victims (R v Kennedy [2007] UKHL 38), making answer A incorrect. You must take your victims as you find them, making answer B incorrect (R v Blaue [1975] 1 WLR 1411) and answer D incorrect (R v Haywood (1908) 21 Cox CC 692).

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.2.6

2. Incomplete Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — It does not matter that SALE and ALISON BURCOTT are unaware of the existence of each other—there is still a conspiracy between JOHN BURCOTT and SALE (correct answer D). It is worth noting that there would be no conspiracy between ALISON BURCOTT and SALE in these circumstances as they do not know of the existence of each other (there is no meeting of minds between the pair). This makes answer A incorrect. An abandoning of the agreement altogether will not prevent a statutory conspiracy being committed, making answer B incorrect. Just because SALE happens to work at the bank will not prevent a conspiracy taking place, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.3.3.1

2. Answer C — At points ‘A’ and ‘B’, BLACKMAN’s activities are ‘merely preparatory’. At point ‘C’ he ‘embarks on the crime proper’ and has gone beyond mere preparation, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.3.4

3. Answer A — As a general rule, you cannot attempt a summary only offence. However, if the offence is a summary only offence solely because of a statutory limit imposed in some cases (e.g. criminal damage to property of low value or low-value theft), then the offence can be attempted, making answer B incorrect. You can attempt the factually impossible, making answer C incorrect. Answer D is incorrect, as MYCROFT’s actions have gone beyond mere preparation.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.3.4

3. Entry, Search and Seizure

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — When the detained person is in police custody at a designated police station, a s. 18 search is authorised by an officer of the rank of inspector or above, making answer D incorrect. Answer A is incorrect as the search can take place if the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that evidence relating to the indictable offence for which the person has been arrested or to some other indictable offence which is connected to or similar to that offence will be on the premises. Answer C is incorrect because a theft of this nature is an either way offence which means that it is indictable.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.6.5.3

2. Answer A — Section 32 allows an officer to search an arrested person for anything which might be evidence relating to the offence, making answer D incorrect. A search of the bedsit and communal lounge in the house can only take place if DC AHMED has reasonable grounds for believing (not suspecting) that there is evidence for which the search is permitted on those premises. Therefore, answers B and C are incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.6.5.2

3. Answer B — Section 17 of PACE is a power to enter and search in order to arrest not to search for evidence, making answer D incorrect. The power can be executed by an officer in plain clothes in these circumstances, making answer A incorrect. Whether the occupier has been spoken with or not will not stop this power being used, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.6.5.1

4. Answer D — Section 19 is a power of seizure and does not provide a power to search, making answer C incorrect. The power can be used when a constable reasonably believes that the item has either been obtained in consequence of an offence or is evidence in relation to an offence he/she is investigating or any other offences and it is necessary to seize the item to prevent it being lost, damaged, altered or destroyed, making answer B incorrect. Answer A is incorrect as the power can only be used when the officer is ‘lawfully’ on the premises. DC DYER has been told to leave and is no longer ‘lawfully’ on the premises and is a trespasser and cannot then seize any property he may find.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.6.8.1

5. Special Warnings

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — Answers A and C are incorrect as, although the necklace was not found on DOOLEY’s person or in or on his clothing or footwear, this would not preclude the giving of a special warning to DOOLEY in these circumstances. Answer D is incorrect, as it does not matter who gives the special warning to DOOLEY.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 1.9.2.4 to 1.9.2.5

2. Answer D — Special warnings do apply to ‘no comment’ interviews, making answer B incorrect. Answer C is incorrect, as the presence of a solicitor is immaterial as long as the suspect has had the opportunity to consult one. Answer A is incorrect, as SINGH was not arrested ‘at a place at or about the time the offence was committed’.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 1.9.2.4 to 1.9.2.5

3. Answer A — Sections 36(2) and 37(2) state that inferences can be drawn from ‘special warnings’ by a magistrates’ court (enquiring into an offence as examining justices in deciding whether to grant an application for dismissal made by the accused under s. 6 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980), making answer B incorrect. This can be in respect of ‘special warnings’ under either s. 36 or s. 37 of the Act, making answer C incorrect. A defendant cannot be convicted solely on an inference drawn from a failure or refusal (s. 38(3)), making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 1.9.2.4 to 1.9.2.5

6. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) 2000

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer C — A CHIS is someone who establishes or maintains a relationship with another person for the covert purpose of obtaining information or providing access to information or who covertly discloses information obtained by the use of such a relationship. This will not cover members of the public who contact the police and supply general information to them, making answer A incorrect. Answer B is incorrect as the definition will not cover instances where members of the public have come across information in the ordinary course of their jobs and who suspect criminal activity and then pass that information to the police. However, once the police begin to direct the person, for example by asking them to develop the information in some way to enhance it, that person could then become a CHIS making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 1.13.3. to 1.13.3.2

2. Answer B — Intrusive surveillance deals with surveillance on residential premises or private vehicles, making answers A and C incorrect as this is taking place in factory premises. The activity would be covered by the Act, making answer D incorrect, as this is a specific operation that is covert and likely to result in the obtaining of private information about a person.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.13.4.2

3. Answer A — In ordinary circumstances the authorising officer for directed surveillance will be of the rank of superintendent or above and the authorisation will last for three months beginning on the day on which the authorisation was granted.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 1.13.4.1

7. Homicide

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — The House of Lords ruled that the doctrine of transferred mens rea does not fully apply to an unborn baby, making answer D incorrect. If ADRIAN’s intention is to kill JOAN this may support a charge of murder of the baby in these circumstances, making answer A incorrect. If the intention is to commit GBH to JOAN and the baby is born alive, but later dies from injuries received in the womb, it is manslaughter, making answer B correct. Answer C is incorrect as a consequence of this.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.1.2

2. Answer A — The special defence of loss of control can only be used when the defendant is charged with the offence of murder, not attempted murder. This makes answers B, C and D incorrect. A consequence of a successful plea would be to reduce murder to manslaughter (not attempted murder to a s. 18 wounding), making answer C further incorrect. The consent of the DPP is not required to raise the defence, making answer D further incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.1.3.2

3. Answer D — The sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment (not mandatory), making answer C incorrect. Answers A and B are incorrect, because to be guilty of manslaughter by unlawful act the defendant must have the required mens rea for the unlawful act. This question is based on the case of R v Lamb [1967] 2 QB 981, where the defendant was shown (in mirror circumstances to this question) not to have the required mens rea for assault and his conviction for manslaughter was quashed.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.1.4.1

8. Misuse of Drugs

Answers to Scenario-Based Questions

1. Section 37 of the Misuse Drugs Act 1971 defines ‘cannabis’. It states that cannabis means any plant of the genus Cannabis or any part of any such plant, except that it does not include any of the following products after separation from the rest of the plant:

  • mature stalk of any such plant,

  • fibre produced from mature stalk of any such plant, and

  • seed of any such plant.

Mrs GRUNDY is only in possession of the seeds and commits no offence.

2. Section 6 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 simply says that it shall not be lawful to cultivate any plant of the genus Cannabis. Cultivation is not clearly defined, but some form of watering or feeding would be more than sufficient. You may also wish to consider the offence of producing a controlled drug under s. 4(2) of the Act, as ‘production’ means producing by manufacture or by cultivation. The benefits of a charge under this section are simple; production is a drugs trafficking offence and if found guilty the offender can be made the subject of a Drugs Profits Confiscation Order, allowing the court to seize any assets from his/her production activities. Another example of production is found in the making of ‘crack’ cocaine from normal cocaine hydrochloride. The process removes the salt part of the compound, thus creating a more potent drug. If you were able to prove a person’s involvement in this, you would be able to consider the offence of producing a controlled drug as production is by manufacture, cultivation or by any other method.

3. Mrs GRUNDY is fully aware that the cake contains a controlled drug. The fact that it has been prepared in some other way for consumption is irrelevant. Putting the cannabis in a cake for consumption is no different to the more common method of including it with tobacco in a rolled cigarette for consumption. The term ‘supply’ means more than a simple transfer of physical control and includes distribution of a substance. Mrs GRUNDY has distributed the substance and the fact that her friend does not know is irrelevant.

4. Amphetamine (also spelt ‘Amfetamine’) is a Class B controlled drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA) 1971. However, when it is prepared for injection it is automatically reclassified as a Class A drug. Therefore, COLT is in possession of a Class A drug under the MDA 1971. This goes some way to explaining why amphetamine is listed under Class A and Class B in your Investigators’ Manual.

5. COLT clearly possesses a controlled drug (morphine), as the tablets are issued to his mother and not to him. It does not matter whether the drug is illicitly produced or pharmaceutically produced; it remains a Class A drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

6. COLT would have a defence to possession under s. 5(4)(b) in that ‘knowing or suspecting it to be a controlled drug, he took possession of it for the purpose of delivering it into the custody of a person lawfully entitled to take custody of it and that as soon as possible after taking possession of it he took all reasonable steps to deliver it into the custody of such a person’. Therefore, as long as COLT had the authority of his mother to collect the tablets and he took them straight to her as soon as possible, he has a defence to possession.

7. Under s. 23(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, a constable or other authorised person can enter the premises of a person carrying on the business of supplying controlled drugs, and demand the production of and to inspect any books or documents relating to the dealings in such drugs and to inspect any stocks of any such drugs.

8. No. Section 23(3)(a) and (b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 only allows for a Justice of the Peace to grant a search warrant if he/she is satisfied that there are controlled drugs on the premises or documents relating to any transaction or dealing in those controlled drugs. Therefore, any application to search for this machine would not be granted (under this particular section of this Act).

8. Misuse of Drugs

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — In order to be in possession of anything, the common law requires physical control of the object plus knowledge of its presence. If a drug is slipped into RUSH’s pocket and he has no idea it is there, he is not in possession of it.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 2.2.3 to 2.2.3.6

2. Answer C — Possession with intent to supply to an undercover police officer is an offence under this section, making answer A incorrect. Answer B is incorrect as, although possession of this material is relevant to show that GARWOOD is an active dealer generally, it does not prove the offence. The presence of large sums of money can be used to prove the offence (R v Wright [1994] Crim LR 55) making Answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.2.5

3. Answer C — Answer A is incorrect, as the minimum period for such an order is two years (s. 33(3) of the Act). Answer B is incorrect, as the offences covered by travel restriction orders include the production and supply of controlled drugs (therefore including an offence under s. 4(3) of the 1971 Act). Answer D is incorrect, as an offender may apply to the court that made the restriction order to have it revoked or suspended (s. 35 of the Act).

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.2.16

4. Answer D — Section 5 provides a defence to a person charged with an offence of unlawful possession of a drug, making answer B incorrect. It does not matter what type of drug it is or what classification it falls under, making answers A and C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.2.3.8

9. Firearms and Gun Crime

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer A — The firearm must be the means by which life is endangered and the fact that ROBE has possession of the firearm at the time of the offence is immaterial, making answer B incorrect. The fact that the victim of the offence is not injured makes no difference to the commission of this offence, making answer C incorrect. Answer D is correct insofar as the offence does not require the firearm to be produced, but option A supersedes this.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.3.10.1

2. Answer B — This offence is ‘absolute’, but can only be committed if the defendant has with him a loaded shotgun, making answer A incorrect. This fact makes answer C incorrect as well. Answer D is incorrect because the offence is ‘absolute’ and knowledge is not required.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.3.11.1

3. Answer A — Section 47 of the 1968 Firearms Act allows a constable who has reasonable cause to suspect a person has a firearm with him in a public place to require him/her to hand over the firearm for examination by the officer, making answers B and D incorrect. It does not matter whether the firearm is loaded or if the person who is requested to hand over the firearm has ammunition in his/her possession, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.3.12

4. Answer B — It does not matter what NORTH believes as this is an offence of intent—all that is important is that ZULFIKAR intended NORTH to believe that unlawful violence would be used against him by means of the firearm/imitation firearm, making answer A incorrect. The offence can be committed with an imitation firearm making answer D incorrect. An imitation firearm is anything that has the appearance of being a firearm whether capable of discharge or not—it does not matter that the case contains nothing at all, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.3.10.2

10. Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer A — The offence of s. 20 (grievous bodily harm, Offences Against the Person Act 1861) is the only offence that could be racially or religiously aggravated.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.6.1

2. Answer C — Under s. 28(1)(a) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the demonstration of hostility will take immediately before, during or after the offence takes place.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.6.3

11. Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer A — The defendant commits an assault when he/she intentionally or recklessly causes another person to apprehend immediate unlawful violence, making answers B and D incorrect. Answer C is incorrect, as an assault can be committed by words alone.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 2.7.2.3, 2.7.2.4

2. Answer B — The injuries received by MATONI and the child will amount to an offence under s. 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and not to a s. 47 assault (Offences Against the Person Act 1861) making answers C and D incorrect. Answer A is incorrect as THEAKSTON is liable for the injuries the child receives. This is because a battery can be committed indirectly (as per Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire [2000] 3 All ER 890).

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.7.3

3. Answer B — Belief in your own innocence, even if it is thoroughly merited, is no defence to this offence, making answer C incorrect. The offence is committed when a person assaults any person (including members of the public) with intent to resist or prevent their own or another’s arrest, making answers A and D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.7.14.1

4. Answer A — Loss of control is only a defence to murder, making answer D incorrect. The offence has not been committed as WEST did not intend either CRAIG or SARTIN to believe the threat.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.7.15

12. Public Order Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer C — Violent disorder requires three persons to use or threaten unlawful violence. The unlawful violence in this context includes violent conduct towards property as well as violent conduct towards persons.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.9.3

2. Answer D — The House of Lords has held that in order to prove an affray, the threat of unlawful violence has to be towards a person(s) present at the scene (I v DPP [2002] 1 AC 285). If there is nobody present to whom the threat is directed then there is no affray.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.9.4

13. Child Protection

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — The fact that COLETO is the father of all three children will not afford him a defence, as he has taken his children out of the United Kingdom without the consent of his wife who has lawful custody of all of the children, making answer D incorrect. The relevant age for an offence under s. 1 of the Act is ‘under the age of 16’. This means that the offence is not committed with regard to Anthony who is 16 years old, but is committed with regard to Phillippa (aged 14 years) and Mark (aged 12 years), making answers A and C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.10.2.1

2. Answer A — Answer B is incorrect, as there is no requirement that the removal of the child from a person’s lawful control be accomplished by the use of force or physical constraint. Answer C is incorrect, as whether CURTIS has an ulterior motive for the removal is immaterial. In R v Mousir [1987] Crim LR 561 it was said that the phrase ‘so as to’ in s. 2(1)(a) of the Act is concerned with the objective consequences of the taking or detaining, and not with the accused’s subjective motives. Answer D is incorrect, as the consent of the victim is irrelevant.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.10.2.3

3. Answer B — There are three defences available to an offence under s. 2 of the Act.

  1. (3) … it shall be a defence for [the defendant] to prove—

    • where the father and mother of the child in question were not married to each other at the time of his birth—

      • that he is the child’s father; or

      • that, at the time of the alleged offence, he believed, on reasonable grounds, that he was the child’s father; or

    • that, at the time of the alleged offence, he believed that the child had attained the age of 16.

As there are three defences, answer C is incorrect. Answer A is incorrect, as the fact that DAY is not the father of the child does not necessarily mean he commits the offence (because of the other defences). Answer D is incorrect, as PELL has removed the child from DAY’s lawful control.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 2.10.2.3 to 2.10.2.4

14. Offences Involving the Deprivation of Liberty

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer A — An offence of kidnapping can be carried out by the use of force or fraud. When NICKLIN’s wife is moved from the front of POYNER’s house towards NICKLIN’s car, the offence is complete.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.11.2

2. Answer A — The use of force is not required for the offence of false imprisonment, making answer B incorrect. Answer C is incorrect, as UDALL has moved ACTON from one point to another by the use of a fraud and the offence of kidnapping is complete at this point. There is no requirement for the victim to be taken to the offender’s ultimate destination, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 2.11.1 to 2.11.2

3. Answer C — The offence of false imprisonment is committed when a person falsely imprisons another. The state of mind required to commit the offence is the unlawful and intentional/reckless restraint of a person’s freedom. There is no need for force to be used on the person to commit the offence, meaning answer D is incorrect. There is no time limitation on how long a person should be detained in order for the offence to be committed, meaning answer B is incorrect. In R v Shwan [2007] EWCA Crim 1033, the court stated there was no reason why a householder should not be entitled to detain someone in their house whom they genuinely believed to be a burglar, providing a defence to the offence and making answer A incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.11.1

15. Administration of Justice

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer A — The offence can be committed in ‘judicial proceedings’ which includes courts, tribunals or persons hearing evidence on oath, making answer B incorrect. The offence can be committed by a witness or an interpreter, making answer C incorrect. The offence is punishable with seven years’ imprisonment, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.12.2

2. Answer C — A charge of perverting the course of justice does not require the authorisation of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), making answer A incorrect. Answer B is incorrect, as destroying or concealing evidence are just two ways this offence can be committed; there are numerous other ways available as long as there is a positive act by the defendant. The offence can involve intimidating witnesses, but can also involve the destruction, concealment or falsification of evidence, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.12.3

3. Answer A — The fact that the threat is made to MOSS or is made otherwise than in the presence of the victim is immaterial, making answers B and D incorrect. The fact that the original offence is an assault makes no difference to the commission of the offence, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 2.12.4.1

16. Theft

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — Section 2 of the Theft Act 1968 states that a person will not be treated as dishonest if:

  • he appropriates property in the belief that he has the right in law to deprive the other of it (answer A); or,

  • he appropriates property in the belief that he would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it (answer C); or

  • he appropriates property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps (answer B).

A person may be dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.1.3

2. Answer B — If SMITH buys the car in good faith and gives value for it (i.e. a reasonable price), but then discovers it has been stolen, her refusal to return it to GOODALL will not, without more, attract liability for theft (see s. 3(2) of the Theft Act 1968). This makes answers A and C incorrect. Answer D is incorrect, as the same property can be stolen on more than one occasion.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.1.5

3. Answer A — This question relates to s. 5(3) of the Theft Act 1968, which states: where a person (DELACY) receives property from or on account of another (the mortgage funds from BOOTH) and is under an obligation to retain and deal with that property or its proceeds in a particular way (using the money for the mortgage), the property or proceeds shall be regarded (as against him) as belonging to the other (i.e. the mortgage money still belongs to BOOTH). The mortgage funds only ever belong to BOOTH, making answers B, C and D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.1.8

17. Robbery and Blackmail

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — For there to be a robbery there must be a theft. If FISHER honestly believes he has a right in law to the property then he is not dishonest. If he is not dishonest then there is no theft. If there is no theft then there is no robbery.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.2.1

2. Answer B — Answer A is incorrect because this is a threat to use force at some time in the future (this would be a blackmail). The fact that RIHAN is deaf and blind is immaterial. LEWIN sought to put RIHAN in fear of being then and there subjected to force, and just because the threats are not heard or seen makes no difference. Therefore, answer C is incorrect as the threats were first made at point B.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.2.1

3. Answer D — Blackmail is committed when the demand is actually made. It can be a written demand and in such a situation the demand is made when the letter is posted, making answers A and C incorrect. Answer B is incorrect as no special permission is required for a prosecution of blackmail.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.3.1 to 3.3.4

18. Burglary and Aggravated Burglary

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — Abstracting electricity is not theft, so at point A there can be no intent for the purposes of burglary. Once inside, REDGRAVE can only commit burglary in the garage by stealing or causing GBH or attempting either. Criminal damage is not a ‘trigger’ offence, so answer B is incorrect. TWOC is not theft as far as burglary is concerned, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.4.1 to 3.4.3

2. Answer C — At points A and B, BURTOFT has already entered the bedroom and not as a trespasser therefore she cannot commit burglary in the bedroom. Her intention to steal from the loft goes beyond a condition of entry and the moment she enters a separate part of the building she becomes a trespasser, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.4.1

3. Answer B — The rope is a weapon of offence as it is intended to incapacitate a person and comes within the WIFE mnemonic. WARREN actually has physical possession of the rope as well as an intention to use it to incapacitate a person and OAK has knowledge of its existence as well as access; so both men would be caught by the expression ‘has with him’ regarding this item. This means that both men commit an aggravated burglary in relation to the rope. Therefore, WARREN and OAK commit the offence.

While both men have the screwdriver ‘with them’, WARREN does not know of OAK’s intentions regarding the sharpened screwdriver. The screwdriver is a weapon of offence to OAK (as he has sharpened it to use against HOLLAND, i.e. adapted and intends) but not to WARREN, to whom this is just a screwdriver. Therefore OAK commits aggravated burglary in relation to the screwdriver but WARREN does not.

Option D says that both men commit the offence but OAK only commits it in relation to the screwdriver. This is wrong as he commits it in relation to the rope as well.

Option B is right as both men commit the offence but WARREN only commits it in relation to the rope (and not the screwdriver).

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.5.1 to 3.5.2

4. Answer D — Although MARKER enters a building as a trespasser, there is no intention to commit grievous bodily harm, criminal damage or theft when he does so. He believes that he has a lawful right to the money that is owed to him and is therefore not dishonest—no dishonesty = no theft and no offence under s. 9(1)(a) of the Theft Act, eliminating answer A. MARKER does not commit a s. 9(1)(b) offence as this is all about doing something—steal or attempt to steal, commit or attempt to commit grievous bodily harm. Threatening LOVEL is not enough so answer B is incorrect. Criminal damage is not part of the s. 9(1)(b) offence, so answer C is incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.4.1 to 3.4.5

19. Handling Stolen Goods

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — When JONES obtained the lawnmower from HARDING he did not know it was stolen. To handle the goods the defendant must know or believe they are stolen and this is not the case at point A. If the only person ‘benefiting’ from the defendant’s actions is the defendant himself/herself, the element of ‘assisting/acting for another’s benefit’ will not be made out (R v Bloxham [1983] 1 AC 109). This makes answer C incorrect. At point B, JONES has not even tried to dispose of the mower. Merely finding out you have bought stolen property does not make you a handler if you bought the property in good faith.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.7.1, 3.7.4

2. Answer B — The purpose of admitting this evidence is for the purpose of proving that COWSER knew or believed the goods to be stolen goods.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.7.8

3. Answer D — It does not matter what any of the men in this scenario believe or suspect or why they believe or suspect it—the fact is that an offence of handling cannot be committed unless the goods are stolen goods and the watches in the question, although fakes, have not been stolen.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.7.1

20. Fraud

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — The offence of fraud is all about the conduct and intent of the offender. BRADNICK tried to fool RICE and although her trick was unsuccessful it does not alter her liability—the offence is committed when she makes the representation (that she is a nurse) in an effort to gain a financial advantage. Whether it works or not is immaterial as the offence is complete when the representation is made, making answer A incorrect. The fact that BRADNICK did not obtain any financial gain from her efforts makes no difference as she intended to—intention alone does not require a result so answer C is incorrect. Answer D is incorrect as, although an attempt fraud is possible, it will be rare and, as already stated, the offence is complete when the representation is made.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 3.8.2 to 3.8.3

2. Answer A — Section 3 creates an offence of dishonestly failing to disclose information where there is a legal duty to do so—this question clearly involves such an obligation on HAMMERTON. Although the term ‘legal duty’ is not defined, it will include duties under oral contracts as well as written contracts, making answer B incorrect. Answers C and D are incorrect as the offence states that by failing to disclose, the offender intends to make a gain for himself or another or cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. It is the latter italicised comment which makes HAMMERTON guilty of the offence.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.8.5

3. Answer C — The offence is committed by the person having possession or control of articles (control would cover the stamp machine and the identity documents even though they are, in the case of the identity documents, some distance away from VALE). The articles are to be used ‘in the course of or in connection with’ fraud. So the article does not have to be the actual means by which the fraud is carried out. Therefore all of the items are covered. The last point to mention is that although VALE is in his house, this does not alter his guilt as the offence can be committed anywhere at all.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.8.7

4. Answer A — A person commits this offence when they occupy a position in which they are expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another and they dishonestly abuse their position intending to make a gain for themselves or another or to cause loss to another. ROTHWELL intends WebSaints to lose money by failing to take up the chance of a crucial contract in order that a rival company can take it up at his employer’s expense and commits the offence in doing so, ruling out answers C and D. When he clones the software products he once again abuses his position and once again commits the offence, meaning that answer B is incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.8.6

21. Criminal Damage

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — When a defendant is charged with this offence, it must be shown that it was the damage that caused the danger to life. In R v Steer [1988] AC 111, a defendant fired a gun through a window pane. The court felt that, although the defendant was clearly reckless as to the damage his actions would cause, the two people standing behind the window pane were not put in danger by the damage but by the missile. Therefore, the court held that the defendant was not guilty of this offence.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.10.3

2. Answer A — Section 2 of the Act (threats to destroy or damage property) refers to the offence as one of intention. The key element is the defendant’s intention that the person receiving the threat fears it would be carried out. It is immaterial whether the threat is believed (answer C), whether the threat was to commit damage in the future (answer B) or whether the defendant actually intended to carry out the threat (answer D).

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.10.5

3. Answer C — This is an offence of intent, i.e. the damage need not actually have been attempted or committed, making answer D incorrect. A conditional intent, i.e. an intent to use something to cause criminal damage should the need arise, will be enough (R v Buckingham (1976) 63 Cr App R 159) making answer B incorrect. The term used in the definition is ‘custody or control’, which is far wider than ‘possession’; there is no need to show that the defendant actually had the item with him, making answer A incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 3.10.6

22. Sexual Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — Under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Acts 1976 and 1992, victims of most sexual offences (including rape, assault by penetration, sexual assault by touching) are entitled to anonymity throughout their lifetime.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.1.3

2. Answer C — The offence of rape can only be committed by a male, so answer A is incorrect. The offence can only be committed by penetration with the penis, so answer B is incorrect. The penetration by the penis can be to the mouth, anus or vagina, making answer C correct and answer D incorrect as a consequence.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.2.1

3. Answer C — The sex of the victim is immaterial, making answer B incorrect. Penetration can be committed with a part of the body or anything else, making answer D incorrect. Section 79(3) of the Act covers the fact that references to a part of the body (e.g. penis, vagina) will include references to a body part that has been surgically constructed, particularly if it is through gender reassignment. Therefore, the offence is committed when the surgically constructed vagina is penetrated by SUTTON.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 4.2 to 4.2.2

4. Answer A — If the activity would not appear to a reasonable person to be sexual then, irrespective of the sexual gratification the person might derive from the activity, it will not be ‘sexual’. Therefore, weird or exotic fetishes that no ordinary person would regard as being sexual or potentially sexual will not be covered. As the activity is not ‘sexual’, WALTON does not commit the offence, making answers B and D incorrect. Answer C is incorrect, as a sexual organ or potentially sexual organ does not have to be touched for the offence to be committed.

Investigators’ Manual, paras 4.3 to 4.3.4

23. Child Sex Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer B — The fact that LEENEY consented to the activity is irrelevant, making answer A incorrect. Answer C is incorrect as the offence can be committed by someone over the age of 18. If LEENEY were under 13 then the offence would be complete, but as she is 14 years old the prosecution will have to show that COLCOUGH did not reasonably believe that LEENEY was over 16, making answer D incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.4.2

2. Answer D — Answer A is incorrect as the offender for the offence under s. 11 of the Act must be aged 18 or over. Answer B is incorrect as sexual gratification is a required part of the definition. Answer C is incorrect as this offence applies to children who are under 16 years of age. Answer D is correct as it is not necessary to show that the child was aware of the activity in every case.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.4.3

3. Answer B — The fact that the images shown to a child are still or cartoons is immaterial (s. 79(5)), making answer A incorrect. Although TURNER did not initially intend his nephew to see the images, he would commit the offence when he asked him if he wanted to stay (if MARTIN were under 16 years old). MARTIN falls outside the age group for this offence, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.4.4

24. Preparatory Offences

Answers to Multiple-Choice Questions

1. Answer D — Answer A is incorrect, as this is a preparatory offence and there is no need for sexual activity to take place. Answer B is incorrect, as the offence is committed when the substance is administered to WALKER. Alcohol would be classed as a substance, making answer C incorrect.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.7.1

2. Answer A — Virtually all sexual offences are ‘relevant’ offences other than those that exist under the Protection of Children Act 1978, making answer B incorrect. Answers C and D are incorrect as there is no limitation on the type of criminal offence committed. If the offence is one of kidnapping or false imprisonment, then the maximum sentence is increased from 10 years to life.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.7.2

3. Answer B — The defendant must intend to commit the relevant offence on the premises in which he/she is a trespasser.

Investigators’ Manual, para. 4.7.3