DOCSLIB.ORG

Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 By Cerian Charlotte Griffiths Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy September 2017 Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Abstract The inspiration for this thesis comes from a recognition of the problems in prosecuting financial crime in the modern day. In exploring how fraud was prosecuted from 1760 to 1820, this thesis seeks to contextualise modern prosecutorial failings into a longer history of the struggles to define and address fraud and deceptive practices. It also seeks to contribute to existing research into historical financial crime by providing a detailed history of fraud offences and the settings in which these offences had been previously enforced. This thesis will answer three central questions: what offences made up ‘fraud’ by the early nineteenth century? – Who was prosecuting these offences? – and, how was fraud being prosecuted at this time? The first of these questions seeks, for the first time in the literature, to identify and trace fraud offences to the nineteenth century. This thesis will then identify who was prosecuting fraud, and then how they prosecuted fraud in order to explain how fraud offences were shaped through enforcement and how this impacted upon the development of fraud offences. In asking these three central questions, this thesis will provide a lens through which to explain how, and for whom, the criminal justice system operated in the eighteenth century. This thesis explores and categorises all fraud trials heard at the Old Bailey between 1760 and 1820 and builds on these records by using a range of greater and lesser known sources including City of London officials’ notes, government financial records, and more obscure materials of contemporary practitioners. By tracing the prosecution of fraud from the lowest to the highest criminal courts in London, this thesis provides an holistic overview of the choices available to prosecutors of fraud, and explains why so many fraud trials were heard within the senior courts rather than the summary courts. This explanation is made possible by the application of structuralist theories which explain why particular social and economic groups prosecuted fraud offences at such a high level, and how the criminal justice system operated to assist such prosecutions. i Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Table of Contents Glossary of Terms…………………………………………………………………………………………..p.vi List of Tables and Images……………………………………………………………………………....p.ix Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………..………p.x Chapter 1: Introduction………………………………………………………………………………....p.1 The Project: An Overview……………………………………………………………………..…...p.3 Pre-Existing Literature in the Field……………………………………………………………..p.17 Chapter Outline…………………………………………………………………………………….…...p.20 Chapter 2: Methods and Methodology……………………………………………………………p.22 The Old Bailey Sessions Papers: Use as an Historical Source……………………….p.23 The Proceedings: Methodological Considerations……………………………………...p.33 Old Bailey Online (OBO): the Digitisation of the Proceedings……………………..p.35 Searching for Fraud Offences within the OBO…………………………………………….p.40 Additional Archives……………………………………………………………………………………..p.43 Disciplinary Approaches………………………………………………………………………………p.47 Methods of Analysis………………………………………………………………………………….…p.55 ii Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Chapter 3: Fraud: Offences, Ontology, and Connections………………………………..p.60 Fraud: Offences and Ontologies…………………………………………………………………p.63 Fraud and the Wider Criminal Law……………………………………………………………..p.87 The Operation of the Law: Fraud alongside other Offences………………………..p.94 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………....p.95 Chapter 4: Disposal of Fraud Accusations……………………………………………………….p.98 Civil or Criminal? Fraud within the Wider Court System…………………………….p.99 Fraud within the Summary and Quarter Sessions Courts……………………………p.118 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………….p.126 Chapter 5: Fraud in Practice and the People who Prosecuted…………………………p.128 The Occupations of Fraud Prosecutors at the Old Bailey…………………………….p.130 Types of Fraud Heard at the Old Bailey………………………………………………………p.145 Naval Fraud………………………………………………………………………………………………..p.155 Prosecutorial Actors: Complainants and Agents………………………………………….p.172 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………….......p.173 iii Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Chapter 6: The Role of Prosecutors and Tools of Prosecutions……………………….p.177 Deciding the Offence……………………………………………………………………………......p.177 The Role of Clerks………………………………………………………………………………...……p.179 Prosecution Associations and Fraud…………………………………………………………..p.185 Fraud and the Use of Policing and Magistrates’ Agents……………………………..p.199 The Presence of Counsel in Fraud Trials……………………………………………………..p.204 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………….p.211 Chapter 7: Fraud Trials within the Old Bailey………………………………………………….p.213 Fraud in the City and Middlesex…………………………………………………………………p.216 Fraud in the Magistrates’ Courts………………………………………………………………..p.217 Decision-making in the Magistrates’ Courts……………………………………………….p.218 Middlesex…………………………………………………………………………………………………..p.222 The City………………………………………………………………………………………………………p.228 The Naval Exception…………………………………………………………………………………...p.236 The Old Bailey and the Specialised Jury………………………………………………………p.238 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………….p.243 iv Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Chapter 8: Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………….…p.245 Fraud Offences…………………………………………………………………………………………..p.245 Prosecutors of Fraud………………………………………………………………………………….p.248 Methods of Fraud Prosecution…………………………………………………………………..p.249 Concluding Thoughts and Future Research………………………………………………...p.253 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………….p.256 v Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Glossary of Terms Aldermen The City of London elected officials who sat as Magistrates, and from whom one was chosen each year to serve as Lord Mayor of the City. Assize Court The most senior criminal court for trials of first instance. The assize court heard mostly felonies but some misdemeanours. In London, see Old Bailey Crown Court The appellant court within which sat the Twelve Judges. See the Reserved Twelve Judges. Felony The most serious category of criminal offence, some felonies were capital. Historically, a conviction for felony resulted in the forfeiture of all goods. By the eighteenth century the main procedural characteristic was the denial by right of defence counsel in matters of felony. Guildhall Where the Aldermen of the City of London held Summary Court Sessions, see Summary Courts. King’s Bench A common law court which heard both criminal and civil matters. Criminal cases could be removed from ordinary criminal courts using a writ of Certiorari. Magistrates See Summary Courts Court vi Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Mansion House Where the Lord Mayor of London held Summary Court Sessions, see Summary Courts. Metropolis London was made up of the City of London, Middlesex, and (London) Westminster. The Metropolis in the eighteenth century covered the central and northern parts of modern London; south of the river Thames was Southwark which formed part of London but which fell under the jurisdiction of Surrey. See Image 7.1 Misdemeanour The least serious category of criminal offence, some misdemeanours could result in seven years transportation. By right, a prisoner was entitled to counsel in matters of misdemeanour. Old Bailey The assize court for the entire Metropolis of London but which sat within the walls of the City of London. Petty Sessions Another term for a Summary Court Quarter The second highest criminal court in England in which could be heard Sessions felonies or misdemeanours but which heard primarily misdemeanours. Quarter Sessions sat four times a year and were sometimes referred to as ‘Sessions’ for short-hand. Sessions This can refer to Petty Sessions or Quarter Sessions depending on the context of the usage. vii Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 Star Chamber Established in the fifteenth century as a court (ostensibly) hearing prosecutions and litigation against socially and economically powerful persons. Decisions of the Star Chamber are contentious as it is well recognised that the court abused its position to pursue political opponents. Summary The lowest criminal court which heard mostly criminal matters and Courts often acted as the first court to which a criminal complaint was made. Presided over by Magistrates. The work of these courts would largely be transferred to the Police Courts in the nineteenth century. See Magistrates’ Court and Petty Sessions Twelve Judges The senior professional twelve judges in England who decided on matters of law appealed to the Crown Court Reserved. These judges also sat within courts of first instance such as the assize courts, including the Old Bailey. viii Prosecuting Fraud in the Metropolis, 1760-1820 List of Tables and Images Tables Table 4.1: The Value of Goods Obtained by Fraud Indictments Table 4.2: Disposal of Fraud Accusation in the City of London Summary Courts Table 4.3: Sample of Quarter Sessions Recognizances in Middlesex and Westminster, 1760-1820. Table 4.4: Sample of Quarter Sessions Recognizances in the City of London, 1760- 1820. Table 5.1: Occupations of Prosecutors of Fraud Table 5.2: Forms of Fraud Heard at
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Imagereal Capture
    Some Aspects of Theft of Computer Software by M. Dunning I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to test the capability of New Zealand law to adequately deal with the impact that computers have on current notions of crimes relating to property. Has the criminal law kept pace with technology and continued to protect property interests or is our law flexible enough to be applied to new situations anyway? The increase of the moneyless society may mean a decrease in money motivated crimes of violence such as robbery, and an increase in white collar crime. Every aspect of life is being computerised-even our per­ sonality is on character files, with the attendant )ossibility of criminal breach of privacy. The problems confronted in this area are mostly definitional. While it may be easy to recognise morally opprobrious conduct, the object of such conduct may not be so easily categorised as criminal. A factor of this is a general lack of understanding of the computer process, so this would seem an appropriate place to begin the inquiry. II. THE COMPUTER Whiteside I identifies five key elements in a computer system. (1) Translation of data into a form readable by the computer, called input; and subject to manipulation by the introduction of false data. Remote terminals can be situated anywhere outside the cen­ tral processing unit (CPU), connected by (usually) telephone wires over which data may be transmitted, e.g. New Zealand banks on­ line to Databank. Outside users are given a site code number (identifying them) and an access code number (enabling entry to the CPU) which "plug" their remote terminal in.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 Criminal Conduct Offences
    Chapter 8 Criminal conduct offences Page Index 1-8-1 Introduction 1-8-2 Chapter structure 1-8-2 Transitional guidance 1-8-2 Criminal conduct - section 42 – Armed Forces Act 2006 1-8-5 Violence offences 1-8-6 Common assault and battery - section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 1-8-6 Assault occasioning actual bodily harm - section 47 Offences against the Persons Act 1861 1-8-11 Possession in public place of offensive weapon - section 1 Prevention of Crime Act 1953 1-8-15 Possession in public place of point or blade - section 139 Criminal Justice Act 1988 1-8-17 Dishonesty offences 1-8-20 Theft - section 1 Theft Act 1968 1-8-20 Taking a motor vehicle or other conveyance without authority - section 12 Theft Act 1968 1-8-25 Making off without payment - section 3 Theft Act 1978 1-8-29 Abstraction of electricity - section 13 Theft Act 1968 1-8-31 Dishonestly obtaining electronic communications services – section 125 Communications Act 2003 1-8-32 Possession or supply of apparatus which may be used for obtaining an electronic communications service - section 126 Communications Act 2003 1-8-34 Fraud - section 1 Fraud Act 2006 1-8-37 Dishonestly obtaining services - section 11 Fraud Act 2006 1-8-41 Miscellaneous offences 1-8-44 Unlawful possession of a controlled drug - section 5 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 1-8-44 Criminal damage - section 1 Criminal Damage Act 1971 1-8-47 Interference with vehicles - section 9 Criminal Attempts Act 1981 1-8-51 Road traffic offences 1-8-53 Careless and inconsiderate driving - section 3 Road Traffic Act 1988 1-8-53 Driving
    [Show full text]
  • Itu Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation
    International Telecommunication Union Cybercrime Legislation Resources ITU TOOLKIT FOR CYBERCRIME LEGISLATION Developed through the American Bar Association’s Privacy & Computer Crime Committee Section of Science & Technology Law With Global Participation ICT Applications and Cybersecurity Division Policies and Strategies Department ITU Telecommunication Development Sector Draft Rev. February 2010 For further information, please contact the ITU-D ICT Applications and Cybersecurity Division at [email protected] Acknowledgements We are pleased to share with you a revised version of the ITU Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation. This version reflects the feedback received since the launch of the Toolkit in May 2009. If you still have input and feedback on the Toolkit, please do not hesitate to share this with us in the BDT’s ICT Applications and Cybersecurity Division at: [email protected]. (The deadline for input on this version of the document is 31 July 2010.) This report was commissioned by the ITU Development Sector’s ICT Applications and Cybersecurity Division. The ITU Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation was developed by the American Bar Association’s Privacy & Computer Crime Committee, with Jody R. Westby as the Project Chair & Editor. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without written permission from the ITU and the American Bar Association. Denominations and classifications employed in this publication do not imply any opinion concerning the legal or other status of any territory or any endorsement or acceptance of any boundary. Where the designation "country" appears in this publication, it covers countries and territories. The ITU Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation is available online at: www.itu.int/ITU-D/cyb/cybersecurity/legislation.html This document has been issued without formal editing.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Huddersfield Repository
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Huddersfield Repository University of Huddersfield Repository Drake, P J Is the requirement of dishonesty always the best policy to estabish liability against those who assist in a breach of trust? Original Citation Drake, P J (2011) Is the requirement of dishonesty always the best policy to estabish liability against those who assist in a breach of trust? Masters thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/11652/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ IS THE REQUIREMENT OF DISHONESTY ALWAYS THE BEST POLICY TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY AGAINST THOSE WHO ASSIST IN A BREACH OF TRUST? Philip J Drake A dissertation submitted for the award of the degree of Master of Laws (LLM) The University of Huddersfield May 2011 .
    [Show full text]
  • The International Sports Law Journal 2003, No. 2
    ISLJ 2003/2 Def 01-07-2004 10:13 Pagina A 2003/2 World Anti-Doping Code Kolpak Case Terror and Politics in Sport Sports Torts and Negligence Powers of USOC Dual Nature of Football Clubs Social Dialogue in European Football ISLJ 2003/2 Def 01-07-2004 10:13 Pagina B K LUWER C ONGRES *** Congres Sport & Recht Juridische actualiteiten en knelpunten op sportgebied Dinsdag 16 december 2003 • Meeting Plaza Olympisch Stadion, Amsterdam ■ Mondiale doping regelgeving: achtergrond, inhoud en praktische consequenties van de World Anti Doping Code ■ Recente uitspraken schadeaansprakelijkheid Spel en Sport (HR); deelnemers Sprekers onderling; aansprakelijkheid trainers / coaches; letselschade door paarden Mr. Fred Kollen Mr. Steven Teitler ■ Overheidssteun aan betaald voetbal; Nationale en Europese invalshoek Mr. Cor Hellingman Mr. Mark J.M. Boetekees Prof. mr. Heiko T. van Staveren ■ Verenigingsrechtelijke ontwikkelingen in de sport; bestuurlijk invulling van Mr. Hessel Schepen de tuchtrechtspraak; de positie van afdelingsverenigingen bij sportbonden en het duaal stelsel; mediation bij verenigingsrechtelijke conflicten Kosten € 575,- p.p. (excl. BTW) ■ Sportrecht bezien vanuit de rechterlijke macht Kluwer bundel 5 Sport & Recht 2003 Deze nieuwe uitgave ontvangt u bij deelname en is bij de prijs inbegrepen. ❑ Ja, ik ontvang graag meer informatie over het congres ‘Sport & Recht’ Antwoordkaart verzenden per fax of in ❑ Ja, ik wil deelnemen aan het congres ‘Sport & Recht’ open envelop zonder postzegel aan: Kluwer Opleidingen, Dhr./Mevr.: Antwoordnummer 424, 7400 VB Deventer Functie: T 0570 - 64 71 90 F 0570 - 63 69 41 Bedrijf: E [email protected] Aard van het bedrijf: W www.kluweropleidingen.nl Postbus/Straat: Kluwer legt uw gegevens vast voor de uitvoering van de overeenkomst.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Requirement of Dishonesty Always the Best Policy to Estabish Liability Against Those Who Assist in a Breach of Trust?
    University of Huddersfield Repository Drake, P J Is the requirement of dishonesty always the best policy to estabish liability against those who assist in a breach of trust? Original Citation Drake, P J (2011) Is the requirement of dishonesty always the best policy to estabish liability against those who assist in a breach of trust? Masters thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/11652/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ IS THE REQUIREMENT OF DISHONESTY ALWAYS THE BEST POLICY TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY AGAINST THOSE WHO ASSIST IN A BREACH OF TRUST? Philip J Drake A dissertation submitted for the award of the degree of Master of Laws (LLM) The University of Huddersfield May 2011 .
    [Show full text]
  • Fraud in England and Wales
    Fraud in England and Wales AN INTRODUCTION TO UK LEGISLATION | JULY 2020 | SECOND EDITION The way in which criminal fraud is defined, investigated and prosecuted differs across the UK. This guide explains how fraud is usually dealt with under the criminal law in England and Wales. WHAT IS FRAUD? • When a person has in their • the common law offence of possession or under their control, any conspiracy to defraud; and Fraud can be broadly defined as the article for use in the course of, or in deliberate use of deception or dishonesty • offences under the Bribery Act 2010; connection with, any fraud (s6). to disadvantage or cause loss (usually Computer Misuse Act 1990; Forgery financial) to another person or party. • When a person makes, adapts, and Counterfeiting Act 1981; Identity Definitions of fraud vary from country to supplies or offers to supply any Documents Act 2010; Proceeds of country and between legal systems. article knowing that it is designed or Crime Act 2002; or the Financial In England and Wales fraud can be dealt adapted for use in fraud, or intended Services and Markets Acts 2000 with through the criminal justice system, to be used to commit fraud (s7). and 2012. the civil justice system, or both. This • When a person knowingly guide explains the criminal process only. participates in a business which CIVIL FRAUD is carried on with the intention of OVERVIEW OF THE LAW defrauding creditors or for any other Conduct which may constitute a In England and Wales, criminal fraud is fraudulent purpose (s9). criminal fraud can also result in civil mainly dealt with in the Fraud Act 2006 Offences under ss2, 3 and 4 require liability.
    [Show full text]
  • Fraud Act 2006 (C
    10/23/2014 Fraud Act 2006 (c. 35) xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" Fraud Act 2006 2006 CHAPTER 35 An Act to make provision for, and in connection with, criminal liability for fraud and obtaining services dishonestly. [8th November 2006] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—​ Fraud 1 Fraud (1) A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence). (2) The sections are— (a) section 2 (fraud by false representation), (b) section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and (c) section 4 (fraud by abuse of position). (3) A person who is guilty of fraud is liable— (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both); (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both). (4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12 months were a reference to 6 months. 2 Fraud by false representation (1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Robert Trossel Loses Medical License
    FITNESS TO PRACTISE PANEL 11 JANUARY – 5 MARCH 2010 27 MARCH 2010; 10-11 APRIL 2010 6 – 10 & 27 – 29 SEPTEMBER 2010 Regent’s Place, 350 Euston Road, London, NW1 3JN Name of Respondent Doctor: Dr Robert Theodore Henri Kees TROSSEL Registered Qualifications: Artsexamen 1980 Universiteit te Leiden Registration Number: 6049460 Type of Case: New case of impairment by reason of: misconduct; caution and conviction Panel Members: Professor B Gomes da Costa, Chairman (Lay) Mrs M Bamford (Lay) Dr S Pande (Medical) Mrs S Pond (Lay) Ms E Tessler (Lay) Legal Assessor: Mr R Hay (Days 1 – 41 & 47 - 49) Mr D Mason (Days 42 - 46) Secretary to the Panel: Ms J Hazell (Days 1 to 46) Mr A Elliott (Days 47 – 49) Representation: GMC: Mr Tom Kark, Counsel, instructed by Field Fisher Waterhouse, represented the General Medical Council. Doctor: Dr Trossel was present and was represented by Mr Robert Jay, QC, instructed by Eastwoods Solicitors. ALLEGATION That being registered under the Medical Act 1983, as amended, 1. At all material times you were a medical practitioner with consulting rooms at 57a New Cavendish Street, London, 15a Wimpole St, London and in Rotterdam, Holland; Amended to read: At all material times you were a medical practitioner with consulting rooms at 57a Wimpole St, London and in Rotterdam, Holland; Admitted as amended and found proved. 1 Patient A 2. On or about 17 10 August 2004 you had a consultation in Rotterdam with Patient A, Admitted, as amended, and found proved i. Patient A suffered from Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Admitted and found proved ii.
    [Show full text]
  • Banding of Offences in the Advocates' Graduated Fee Scheme
    Banding of Offences in the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) Version 1.1 February 2018 Banding of Offences in the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) Version 1.1 This information is also available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/banding-of-offences-in-the-advocates-graduated-fee- scheme Banding of Offences in the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) Contents Introduction 2 Table A 3 Table B 8 1 Banding of Offences in the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) Introduction This document sets out the banding of offences under the reformed Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (the "AGFS"), in force from 1 April 2018. The principal legislation which provides for the AGFS is the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/435); in particular, see Schedule 1 to those Regulations. The bands are set out in Table B of this document, which should be read in conjunction with Table A. Where the band within which an offence described in Table B in this document falls depends on the facts of the case, the band within which the offence falls is to be determined by reference to Table A. In Table A and Table B, "category" is used to provide a broad, overarching description for a range of similar offences which fall within a particular group or range of bands. 2 Banding of Offences in the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) Table A Category Description Bands 1 Murder/Manslaughter Band 1.1: Killing of a child (16 years old or under); killing of two or more persons; killing of a police officer, prison officer or equivalent public servant in the course of their duty; killing of a patient in a medical or nursing care context; corporate manslaughter; manslaughter by gross negligence; missing body killing.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Criminal Offences
    Criminal offences Offence Contrary to Year and chapter Class A: Homicide and related grave offences Murder Common law Manslaughter Common law Soliciting to commit murder Offences against the 1861 c. 100 Person Act 1861 s.4 Child destruction Infant Life (Preservation) 1929 c. 34 Act 1929 s.1(1) Infanticide Infanticide Act 1938 s.1(1) 1938 c. 36 Causing explosion likely to endanger life or Explosive Substances Act 1883 c. 3 property 1883 s.2 Attempt to cause explosion, making or keeping Explosive Substances Act as above explosive etc. 1883 s.3 Class B: Offences involving serious violence or damage, and serious drugs offences Endangering the safety of an aircraft Aviation Security Act 1982 1982 c. 36 s. 2(1)(b) Racially-aggravated arson (not endangering life) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 c. 37 1998 s. 30(1) Kidnapping Common law False imprisonment Common law Aggravated criminal damage Criminal Damage Act 1971 1971 c. 48 s.1(2) Aggravated arson Criminal Damage Act 1971 as above s.1(2), (3) Arson (where value exceeds £30,000) Criminal Damage Act 1971 as above s.1(3) Possession of firearm with intent to endanger life Firearms Act 1968 s.16 1968 c. 27 Use of firearm to resist arrest Firearms Act 1968 s.17 as above Possession of firearm with criminal intent Firearms Act 1968 s.18 as above Possession or acquisition of certain prohibited Firearms Act 1968 s.5 as above weapons etc. Aggravated burglary Theft Act 1968 s.10 1968 c. 60 Armed robbery Theft Act 1968 s.8(1) as above Assault with weapon with intent to rob Theft Act 1968 s.8(2) as above Blackmail Theft Act 1968 s.21 as above Riot Public Order Act 1986 s.1 1986 c.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.4 Nettleship V Weston
    Law’s Fictions Reading Law as Literature Alexandra Reichelt A Thesis Presented to the Department of Literature, Area Studies, and European Languages University of Oslo In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the MA Degree Spring 2016 I II III Law’s Fictions Reading Law as Literature Alexandra Reichelt IV © Alexandra Reichelt 2016 Law’s Fictions: Reading Law as Literature Alexandra Reichelt http://www.duo.uio.no Trykk: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo V VI Abstract This thesis seeks to explore how narrative functions in law, and how case law can be read as literature. The analysis is based on the close-reading of three central judgements in the field of negligence, a kind of tort law, in British common law. Applying narratology to law demands certain adaptations, such as the inclusion of the narrator into the implied author. There are also narratives structures that are particular to case law. The analysis focuses on three main aspects of case law as literature, in three judgements. The analysis of Donoghue v Stevenson concerns the frame narrative and the implied authors specially. The second judgement, Smith v Leech Brain, is centred around fact narratives, or statements of fact. Finally, the analysis of Nettleship v Weston focuses on competing narratives. Throughout this thesis is focused on the ethics of literature, as seen in the implied authors’ ethical standards. This thesis seeks to prove that literary analysis can be applied to case law, and that there are aspects of judgements that can only be unearthed through literary analysis. VII VIII Acknowledgements First, thank you to my supervisors, Tore Rem and Rebecca Scherr, for allowing me to explore my mad ideas and helping me do it.
    [Show full text]