[LMB] OT: breaking rules
M R L Dolbear
m.dolbear at lineone.net
Sun Sep 20 21:35:08 BST 2015
From: Howard Brazee
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 7:12 PM
>> On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:46 AM, fishman at panix.com wrote:
> > I am annoyed by the expansion of the meaning of burgle. I believe that
> > the proper definition is to break and enter. Many people extend that to
> > include theft, which is properly a separate crime.
> I haven’t come across that, but theft is a more inclusive crime that
> includes burglary as a subset.
Here in England, you can commit burglary without stealing or intending to
steal or indeed breaking and entering.
(1) A person is guilty of burglary if—
(a) he or she enters any building or part of a building as a trespasser
and with intent to commit any such offence as is mentioned in subsection (2)
(b) having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser he
steals or attempts to steal anything in the building or that part of it or
inflicts or attempts to inflict on any person therein any grievous bodily
(2) The offences referred to in subsection (1)(a) above are offences of
stealing anything in the building or part of a building in question, of
inflicting on any person therein any grievous bodily harm ... therein, and
of doing unlawful damage to the building or anything therein.
The old law had to decide whether inserting a lock pick was "entering" and
even the new law convicts of burglary a person who made himself a cup of tea
with gas (stealing the gas, own teabag) but not one who used an electric
kettle (using the electricity being a crime but not one "mentioned in
subsection (2) below;"
Little Egret by email (Windows Live Mail)
Michael Dolbear in Walton-on-Thames
More information about the Lois-Bujold