The defendants were boys of 13 and 11. They broke into a school, stole various items and ‘used 12 tubes of duplicating ink to redecorate the school’. They offered no evidence and submitted that there was no case to answer as the prosecution had not rebutted the presumption that they did not know that they were doing was wrong. The magistrates convicted them on the ground that ordinary boys of their ages would have known that they were doing wrong.
Held: The appeals succeeded. The magistrates could not assume that the defendants had the understanding of ordinary boys of their ages. The prosecution should have adduced evidence of this. However, Forbes J discussed the law of doli incapax: ‘in these days of universal education from the age of 5 it seems ridiculous that evidence of some mischievous discretion should be required if a case of malicious damage is committed as it was in this case.’
Judges:
Forbes J
Citations:
[1981] Crim LR 632
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v T CACD 16-Apr-2008
The twelve year old defendant had pleaded guilty to several allegations of sexual assault. The judge had ruled that it was not open to him to plead doli incapax. He appealed saying that only the presumption of doli incapax had been abolished, and . .
Cited – JTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Children
Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.269705