Is it an offence to cause criminal harm to your own belongings?

Comments

  • I should think not. Y'all can't press charges on yourself lol

    For criminal charges, its the Crown, in the course of the CPS, that bring charges.

  • I imagine yep is the answer equally long as it doesn't bear upon anyone else or pose a danger.

    Getting locked out & breaking your door down or smashing your window in is a archetype case of criminal impairment to your own home - happens all the time.

    That is not an example of criminal impairment. You lot are breaking your own glass in your own property and then in that location is no offence.

    Nonetheless, for the OP, if your house was a listed propertry, or, more seriously, y'all chopped downward or impairment a tree on your property with a preservation order, you will virtually certainly face criminal prosecution.

  • Say you lot grew a certain mushroom in your garden, harvested it, prepared and ate it alone in the privacy of your own abode. The only person affected past this is yourself. No tax revenue has been lost. No person has been harmed. You lot are the merely victim of your own supposed criminal offence, nonetheless yous would however exist prosecuted according to the harshest level of our drug laws.

    I think I empathize simply why are you a victim if you suffered no impairment?

  • camercamer Posts: v,237

    Forum Fellow member

    ✭

    For criminal charges, its the Crown, in the form of the CPS, that bring charges.

    Just in England and Wales, there is no CPS in Scotland or Due north.I who have a Public Prosecution Service and Scotland who have the Crown Office.

  • Suicide and attempted suicide used to be illegal in the Uk until 1961 when the Suicide Act came in to say that it wasn't. Some religions also used to forbid the burying of a suicide victim in consecrated ground but that rarely happens now.

    They as well used to decapitate people who committed suicide.

    This act only applies to England and Wales, you can be charged with breach of the peace in Scotland and N.I when attempting suicide and so its withal illegal in those parts of the U.K, suicide has been legal in Eire since 1993.

    Information technology'south was a crazy law with consequences even if your attempt was successful

    At common law suicide was a felony. Though the person who took his life was personally beyond the reach of the law, there were consequences. The property of a suicide was forfeit and this would accept affected his family. The confiscation of the property of suicides was put to an end with the general abolition of forfeiture for felony by the Forfeiture Deed, 1870.

    http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~irishancestors/Law/Suicide.html

  • It would brand sense for suicide or even attempted suicide would be an offence. The person does need assist but how could the police cease someone killing them self without arresting them for their ain protection?

    They detain them under the Mental Health Deed (which is yet classed as an 'arrest' for the powers of PACE, as far as I'yard enlightened).

    Applies to a public place only though, in individual situations information technology is more difficult. But there are things they tin can do.

  • They detain them under the Mental Health Human action (which is still classed equally an 'arrest' for the powers of PACE, as far as I'm aware).

    Applies to a public place just though, in individual situations it is more than difficult. But there are things they can do.

    why non simply arrest them for cattle rustling then de-abort once they are in a pace of safety?

  • were you charged with criminal damage?

    Yes,criminal damage.I wound the police up and they seemed to really want to do me for something.I was fined £30 which covered the price of a new door handle which I'd kicked off and a low-cal fitting that I didn't mean to smash simply was swinging a metal vacuum tube effectually and it was collateral damage.The magistrate plant it all a flake bemusing that I was brought to court for information technology.

  • Yes,criminal damage.I wound the police upwardly and they seemed to really desire to practise me for something.I was fined £30 which covered the cost of a new door handle which I'd kicked off and a light fitting that I didn't mean to smash but was swinging a metal vacuum tube around and it was collateral damage.The magistrate institute information technology all a bit bemusing that I was brought to courtroom for it.

    you did own and not rent?

  • y'all did own and non rent?

    We were actually smack in the middle of ownership the house from our landlord and technically she all the same owned it.I told her what happened and she said the law hadn't even contacted her.I idea maybe they'd gone to her to see if she would printing charges.

  • _ben_ben Posts: 5,758

    Forum Fellow member

    ✭

    I patently don't know what you reported but could it be the constabulary told y'all that what yous were reporting was not really criminal damage.

    I doubtable what they were telling you was that the reason for your call was not a police matter considering it was not criminal damage.

    Criminal damage most certainly is an offence under the "Criminal Damage Human activity 1971"

    Most call call handlers are not police force officers, they are support staff in call centres at present.

    You said you lot had to write to your MP earlier getting an apology from the police, did they apologise to you considering they were wrong about it being criminal impairment or apologise to you about the manner your concerns were handled?

    She told me that criminal damage is not an offence and therefore not a police matter, she didn't comment on whether the activity I was reporting constituted criminal damage. When the police finally came round (more than than a year after I reported the offences in progress) they agreed that what I'd reported certainly was criminal damage. I don't call up exactly what they apologised for, but they certainly told me that their operator was wrong and apologised for that.

  • She told me that criminal impairment is non an offence and therefore not a constabulary matter, she didn't comment on whether the action I was reporting constituted criminal damage. When the law finally came round (more than a yr subsequently I reported the offences in progress) they agreed that what I'd reported certainly was criminal damage. I don't retrieve exactly what they apologised for, but they certainly told me that their operator was wrong and apologised for that.

    Interesting, Information technology sounds like the police that visited a year later on agreed with you.

    It could have been (i don't know) that the civilian did not realise that criminal damage does not accept to be permanent, for example,someone throwing eggs (that tin be washed off) at your window or damaging a hedge (that can grow back)

    Many people practise not know that criminal damage does not have to permanent damage,

    I promise the civilian was talked to and retrained. Information technology is a trouble sometimes, I have had witness statements taken from me by civilian support workers earlier and was less than impressed.

    Where as, an experienced police officer who took a witness statement from me on a different occasion was more knowledgeable and produced a much ameliorate statement.

  • Maybe if yous accept a multiple-personality disorder?

  • _ben_ben Posts: 5,758

    Forum Member

    ✭

    Interesting, It sounds similar the police force that visited a yr later agreed with you.

    It could have been (i don't know) that the civilian did not realise that criminal impairment does not take to be permanent, for case,someone throwing eggs (that tin can be washed off) at your window or dissentious a hedge (that can grow back)

    Many people practise not know that criminal harm does not have to permanent damage,

    It was permanent. On one occasion a gang of kids were vehement downward people's garden fences and smashing physical by hitting it with scaffold poles. On some other occasion they climbed onto my neighbours garage roof and were ripping upwardly the felt and fifty-fifty the woods. I was particularly annoyed that the police wouldn't come out for that, as the hang had previously beaten up my neighbour when he went out to ask them to end kicking a football hard confronting his car.

  • Information technology was permanent. On one occasion a gang of kids were trigger-happy downwards people'southward garden fences and great concrete by hit it with scaffold poles. On another occasion they climbed onto my neighbours garage roof and were ripping up the felt and fifty-fifty the woods. I was peculiarly annoyed that the police wouldn't come out for that, every bit the hang had previously beaten up my neighbour when he went out to ask them to stop kicking a football hard against his car.

    Wow, that's terrible, no wonder yous were annoyed.

  • She told me that criminal impairment is not an offence and therefore not a police affair, she didn't comment on whether the activity I was reporting constituted criminal damage. When the law finally came round (more than than a yr subsequently I reported the offences in progress) they agreed that what I'd reported certainly was criminal damage. I don't call up exactly what they apologised for, but they certainly told me that their operator was incorrect and apologised for that.

    Criminal damage is an offence, and Arson is the same offence, but where fire is used to cause the harm.

    In general terms information technology is not an offence to damage your own property, merely if it is done with intent, or where it is likely to endanger life and so it is. Jointly owned belongings too has complications.

    Fraudulent claims etc are separate matters.

  • seacamseacam Posts: 21,355

    Forum Member

    ✭✭✭

    To willfully or maliciously destroy, injure, disfigure, or deface any public or individual property, existent or personal, without the consent of the owner or person having custody or command by cutting, trigger-happy, breaking, mark, painting, drawing, covering with filth, or any other such means equally may

    And so technically, if you had lent your friend the ornament and it was in his house and yous and then went at that place and smashed the ornament you would commit criminal impairment because your friend had "custody and control" of it at that time.

    I doubtfulness the police would be bothered with it all to be honest.

    Nonsense, no technical nothing about information technology, no crime,-- criminal damage of ones ain belongings,--- has been committed.

    If you own the property

    you lot

    damage, consent is assumed regardless of location or who has custody of item/s.

    At that place may exist another kind of crime committed if you lot break said particular in a friends house, threating behavior that kind of thing,---I don't know, otherwise cypher technical about it, no criminal offense committed.

  • SkycladSkyclad Posts: three,946

    Forum Fellow member

    ✭✭✭

    Interesting question. Is it possible to exist both the perpetrator and the victim of the same crime?

    Suicide?

  • Suicide?

    Suicide isn't a crime.

  • Criminal impairment is an offence, and Arson is the same offence, simply where fire is used to cause the impairment.

    In full general terms information technology is non an offence to harm your own property, but if it is done with intent, or where it is likely to endanger life then it is. Jointly owned property besides has complications.

    Fraudulent claims etc are separate matters.

    I didn't know arson was part of the criminal harm laws, I always thought it was an offence in it's ain right.

    I was also once told by a probation officer who was giving a talk that arson is really a sex activity criminal offense.

    She said that this was because arsonists are ofttimes found masturbating whilst watching the burning edifice, firemen etc as they often practise it for the sexual excitement.

    I never really believed this.

  • Nonsense, no technical null about it, no crime,-- criminal impairment of ones own property,--- has been committed.

    If yous own the property

    yous

    damage, consent is assumed regardless of location or who has custody of detail/southward.

    In that location may be another kind of offense committed if you lot interruption said particular in a friends firm, threating behavior that kind of thing,---I don't know, otherwise nothing technical nigh it, no criminal offense committed.

    Yous're right. I'one thousand not sure where the poster got that definition from, but information technology is not from the Criminal harm Act.

  • It would make sense for suicide or even attempted suicide would be an offence. The person does demand assist only how could the constabulary stop someone killing them self without arresting them for their own protection?

    I believe that the Mental Health Deed allows the police force to detain persons who they believe have become mentally unstable.

    I remember I sympathise merely why are you a victim if you lot suffered no damage?

    I think it's because the person took drugs in an illegal form, they are a victim of the supplier of said drugs, even so the fact that the supplier was themselves.

    The fact that they didn't harm themselves is not relevant.

  • Say you grew a certain mushroom in your garden, harvested information technology, prepared and ate it alone in the privacy of your own home. The only person affected by this is yourself. No tax acquirement has been lost. No person has been harmed. You are the simply victim of your ain supposed crime, all the same y'all would even so be prosecuted according to the harshest level of our drug laws.

    In this scenario, I wonder if the person would be prosecuted for supplying drugs too as using them?

  • seacamseacam Posts: 21,355

    Forum Fellow member

    ✭✭✭

    You're right. I'chiliad not sure where the poster got that definition from, only it is non from the Criminal damage Deed.

    Kinda of made sense to me it wasn't.

    I am sure Scoobie121 was quoting from other sources and conspicuously doesn't empathise what he was reading or quoting.

  • Suicide isn't a criminal offense.

    Though it does remind me of this classic Urban Fable in which

    a man murders himself.