[nzlug] Re: NZLUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 7

[Nick Rout]

On Tue, January 8, 2008 10:26 pm, John Rye wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:59:52 +1300
> Simon Bridge <simonbridge at ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 19:52 +1300, Damian Turner-Steele wrote:
>> > >
>> > > From: Simon Bridge <simonbridge at ihug.co.nz>
>>
>> > To be successfully prosecuted for theft it has to shown that you
>> intended to
>> > permanently deprive the rightful owner of whatever it is that you
>> stole.
>> >
>> > "So if I take your car and return it before you know it's gone or need
>> to
>> > use it, that isn't theft? If I fill the tank, and it was only
>> half-full
>> > when I took it, did I do you a favour?"
>> >
>> > No you committed the offence of taking without consent which is a
>> lesser
>> > crime. If you returned it with extra fuel you might get a reduced
>> sentence
>> > (do I need irony tags here).
>> >
>> Now that, I did not know. Reinforces my thinking though... sometimes it
>> is good to play Devil's advocate.
>>
>> OT: There's a crime called "conversion" isn't there?
>
> I believe that's a generic term for the charge were the car/vehicle is
> taken for a generic joyride.
>
> As I recall the charge goes something like: "did without colour of
> right convert a <define vehicle> to his own use." However, I'm not sure
> that the charge in this form is still used.
>
> John

Once again its in the legislation, Crimes Act 1961

226 Conversion of vehicle or other conveyance

(1)Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years
who, dishonestly and without claim of right, but not so as to be guilty of
theft, takes or uses for his or her own purposes or another person's
purposes—

(a)any vehicle, ship, or aircraft; or

(b)any part of any vehicle, ship, or aircraft; or

(c)any horse.

So its regarded by the law as serously as theft (same max penalty).

Taking is self explanatory, and at common law you had to "take" to be
guilty of theft. So if you legally and innocently came into possession of
something (borrowed a friend's sofa), but later decided to sell it or keep
it, then you weren't guilty of theft at common law. However the Crimes Act
fixed this many years ago by including as theft "converting to [your] own
use" - which covers the fact scenario I outlined.

Here endeth the legal history lesson.


-- 
Nick Rout