We have detected that your browser is using AdBlock
Police Community is a not for profit organisation and advertising revenue is key to our continued viability.
Please disable your AdBlocker on our site in order to continue using it.
This message will disappear once AdBlock has been disabled.
Thank you for your support - we appreciate it !
If you feel you are getting this message in error please email email@example.com
Thanks all, I appreciate the comments. I see what youre all getting at, that the reward itself is one of the three specified statements, either stating that no q's will be asked OR they will be safe from prosecution OR that the money paid will be repaid and therefore no other gain need be advertised for the offence to be complete. A little ambiguous to say the least but thats the law for you I guess, or maybe its just me! Ive been studying for months and only found out about the case law of R v Lee today, so that was a 9(1)(a) question I got wrong in the mock test!!! I mean seriously, there's 13 days to go until the exam and I cant even get a Burglary question right.... IM DOOMED! Thanks for the help though, folks.
Hi all, I was wondering if any one could offer a bit of advice on a question regarding Advertising a Reward Ive just encountered on the Blackstones Q&A site. The question is CRUCKSHANK is the victim of a burglary. A number of old photographs were stolen during the offence, to which CRUCKSHANK attaches deep emotional value. CRUCKSHANK is desperate to have the photographs returned and, believing that the burglar is a local resident, he persuades ZANDER, the owner of a local newsagent shop, to place an advert in the front of the shop asking for the photographs to be returned. The advert promises that CRUCKSHANK will ask no questions about the burglary as long as the photographs are returned. Considering the offence of advertising a reward (contrary to s. 23 of the Theft Act 1968), which of the below statements is correct? < method=get =exam_question> A Only CRUCKSHANK commits the offence. B Only ZANDER commits the offence. C CRUCKSHANK and ZANDER commit the offence D The offence is not committed as no financial reward was offered for the return of the photographs. > Explanation Answer C — This offence can be committed by the person advertising (CRUCKSHANK) and also the person who prints or publishes the advertisement (ZANDER). This makes answers A and B incorrect. The fact that no financial reward was offered is immaterial. If the advertisement uses words to the effect that no questions will be asked, the offence is committed. Crime, para. 1.12.12 I answered D which was obviously wrong because I thought a reward of some kind had to be offered for the offence to be complete, and in fact Tom Barrons audio crammers mention this as the last thing on the lesson. I appreciate that it may not necessarily have to be a FINANCIAL reward and therefore would have got the question wrong on that front anyway, but surely some kind of reward would have to be offered or is the "asking no questions" bit considered the reward??? I find this unlikely though as the legislation states that its an offence for a public reward..... to use words to the effect that no q's will be asked, etc. So surely the offering of a reward should be a seperate part to the asking no q's. Ok, Ive gone on a bit but Id really appreciate anyones input.