Intentional damage (Section 269(2) Crimes Act 1961)

[Note: This offence can be committed by proving either that the defendant had no interest in the property when he or she damaged it, or that the defendant intended to obtain a benefit [or cause loss to any other person] when he or she damaged the property. The question trail below contains both alternatives. The alternative that does not apply to the charge as framed should be deleted.]

Charge 1: Intentional damage under section 269(2) of the Crimes Act 1961

The Crown must prove each element of the offence. That is called the burden of proof. The Crown carries that burden. Also, the Crown must prove each element beyond reasonable doubt. That is called the standard of proof. It means you must be sure that each element is proved.

1.	Are you sure that Mr Smith damaged the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller?
	If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, go to question two.
2.	Are you sure that Mr Smith intended to damage the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller or was reckless as to whether he did so?
	“Reckless” means that Mr Smith recognised there was a real possibility that the boom traveller could be damaged when he rotated the screw heads with the coin and that, having regard to that possibility, Mr Smith’s actions were unreasonable. “Unreasonable” actions are actions that a reasonable and prudent person would not have taken. If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, go to question three.
3.	Are you sure that Mr Smith damaged the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller without claim of right?
	“Claim of right” means Mr Smith had a genuine belief that, at the time of damaging the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller, he had a lawful right to the crane. If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, go to question four.
4.	Are you sure that, at the time Mr Smith damaged the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller, he had no interest in the crane?
	“Interest”, in relation to any property, includes ownership or share of ownership, or a right to possession of the property. If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, find Mr Smith guilty.
OR
4.	Are you sure that Mr Smith, in damaging the crane by unscrewing the boom traveller, intended to obtain any benefit [or cause loss to any other person]?
	[Note: Amend or delete the words in square brackets above as required.] Benefit means any of the following: (a) benefit, privilege, or service – these do not need to be monetary; or (b) pecuniary advantage – this means that it improves a person’s financial position; or (c) property – this includes land and personal property, any right or interest in any land or personal property, money, electricity, any debt, any right to a claim in court, and any other right or interest; or (d) valuable consideration – means anything involving an exchange of value, whether of a monetary kind or any other. In other words, this means money or money’s worth. If no, find Mr Smith not guilty. If yes, find Mr Smith guilty.