| Hint | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| The threat of force does not have to be genuine or realisable. It's sufficient that D intends to cause the victim to fear being subjected to immediate force, and for the purposes of facilitating the theft. | Bentham | 0%
|
| Snatching something amounts to force | Clouden | 0%
|
| Force can be minimal as long as it's used to facilitate the theft, and is not defined in statute. It is up to juries to decide on a case by case basis. | Dawson & James | 0%
|
| Where D uses force after the taking has occurred, the courts will take a flexible view and view the theft as a continuing act, ensuring D does not escape liability off a technicality. | Hale/Lockley | 0%
|
| The threat of force must be ______ | Immediate | 0%
|
| If there is no completed theft, there cannot be a robbery | Robinson | 0%
|
| Neither does the threat of force have to be effective. It's sufficient that D intends to cause the victim to fear being subjected to immediate force, and for the purposes of facilitating the theft. | R v DPP | 0%
|
| Where D uses force or puts someone in fear of being subjected to force for some reason OTHER than to steal, he will not be guilty of robbery. | Vinall | 0%
|
| 1. A Theft | X | 0%
|
| x | 0%
| |
| 2. Force, or Threat of Force, During or Immediately Before the Theft, to Facilitate It | x | 0%
|
| . | x | 0%
|
| 3. Intent to use/threaten force to facilitate the theft. | x | 0%
|