Theft

Everyday instance of theft: the bike which fits on this wheel has disappeared.

In the criminal law, theft (also known as stealing) is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent. As a term, it is used as shorthand for all major crimes against property, encompassing offences such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, mugging, trespassing, shoplifting, intrusion, fraud (theft by deception) and sometimes criminal conversion. In some jurisdictions, theft is considered to be synonymous with larceny; in others, theft has replaced larceny.

Someone who carries out an act of or makes a career of theft is known as a "thief".

Elements

The actus reus of theft is usually defined as an unauthorised taking, keeping or using of another's property which must be accompanied by a mens rea of dishonesty and/or the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.

For example, if X goes to a restaurant and, by mistake, takes Y's scarf instead of her own, she has physically deprived Y of the use of the property (which is the actus reus) but the mistake prevents X from forming the mens rea (i.e. because she believes that she is the owner, she is not dishonest and does not intend to deprive the "owner" of it) so no crime has been committed at this point. But if she realises the mistake when she gets home and could return the scarf to Y, she will steal the scarf if she dishonestly keeps it. Note that there may be civil liability for the torts of trespass to chattels or conversion in either eventuality.

Theft in English law

Theft was codified into a statutory offence in the Theft Act 1968 which defines it as:

"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". theft act sectin 1 1968

The five elements of the offence are defined sequentially in the Act:

• Section 2 dishonesty;
• Section 3 "appropriation" which occurs when the defendant wrongfully asserts the rights of ownership over the property. This can be by physical taking, but it will also include many different situations (i.e. a failure to return or omission) in which a person may have lawfully come into possession of the property and then keeps or uses the property in an unauthorised way;
• Section 4 "property" includes all personalty, i.e. land itself cannot be stolen but anything severed from the land (with the exception of wild flowers) can be stolen, as can intangible property such as a chose in action;
• Section 5 "belonging to another" requires a distinction to be made between ownership, possession and control:

ownership is where a person is not legally accountable to anyone else for the use of the property:

possession is where a person is only because it had been physically removed but there were two issues to be decided:

did the car "belong to another"? The garage had a lien i.e. a "proprietary right or interest" in the car as security for the unpaid bill and this gave the garage a better right than the owner to possess the car at the relevant time.

what was the relevance of Turner's belief that he could not steal his own property? The defence of mistake of law) only applies if the defendant honestly believes that he has a right in law to act in the given way. Generalised and non-specific beliefs about what the law might permit are not a defence.

• Section 6 "with the intent to permanently deprive the other of it" is sufficiently flexible to include situations where the property is later returned. For example, suppose that B, a keen football fan, has bought a ticket for the next home match. T takes the ticket, watches the match and then returns the ticket to B. In this instance, all that T returns is a piece of paper. Its value as a licence to enter the stadium on a particular day has been permanently lost. Hence, T steals the ticket. Similarly, if T takes a valuable antique but later repents and returns the goods, T has committed the actus reus with the mens rea. The fact that T's conscience forces a change of mind is relevant only for sentencing.

The maximum sentence in the Crown Court is seven years (section 7).

If the act of stealing is already complete before another comes into possession of the goods, this may be handling. For alternative charges involving deceptions, see the deception offences and the Theft Act 1978 which may overlap with s1 Theft. For the theft of motor vehicles with or without violence, see robbery, blackmail and TWOC.

Theft in Victoria - Australia North and south

Theft is defined at s.72 of the Crimes Act 1958. The actus reus and mens rea are defined as follows:

Actus reus

Appropriation - defined at s.73(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 as the assumption of any of the owners rights. It does not have be all the owner's rights, as long as at least one right has been assumed(Stein v Henshall). If the owner gave their consent to the appropriation there cannot be an appropriation(Baruday v R). However, if this consent is obtained by deception, this consent is vitiated.

Property - defined at s.71(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 as being both tangible property, including money and intangible property. Information has been held not be property(Oxford v Moss).

Belonging to another - s.73(5) that property belongs to another if that person has ownership, possession, or a proprietary interest in the property. Property can belong to more than one person. s.73(9) & s.73(10) deal with situations where the accused receives property under an obligation or by mistake.

Mens rea

Intention to permanently deprive - defined at s.73(12) as treating property as it belongs to the accused, rather than the owner.

Dishonestly - s.73(2) creates a negative definition of the term 'dishonestly'. The section deems only three circumstances when the accused is deemed to have been acting honestly. These are a belief in a legal claim of right (s.73(2)(a)), a belief that the owner would have consented (s.73(2)(b)), or a belief the owner could not be found(s.73(2)(c))

Theft in the United States

In the U.S., plenary regulation of theft exists only at the state level, in the sense that most thefts by default will be prosecuted by the state in which they occurred. The federal government has criminalized certain narrow categories of theft which directly affect federal agencies or interstate commerce.

Although many U.S. states have retained larceny as the primary offense, some have now adopted theft provisions.

For example, California consolidated a variety of common law crimes into theft in 1927, and now distinguishes between two types of theft, grand theft and petty theft. Grand theft generally consists of the theft of something of value over $400 (it can be money, labor or property), while petty theft is the default category for all other thefts. Grand theft is punishable by up to a year in jail or prison, and can either be seen as a misdemeanor or felony. while petty theft is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine or six months in jail. As for the older crimes of larceny, embezzling, and stealing, any references to them now mean theft instead.

In many states, grand theft of a vehicle is charged as "grand theft auto" (see motor vehicle theft for more information). This charge became the title of a popular series of video games about stealing cars even though this crime is not what the main plot of the game revolves around (see Grand Theft Auto (series)).

Repeat offenders who continue to steal may become subject to life imprisonment in certain states.

Theft in Canada

Theft is dealt with by Part 9 of the Criminal Code of Canada which is the part that covers property crime. Section 322 in Part 9 creates a general definition of theft, while other sections such as section 326 (which deals with the theft of gas, electricity and telecommunication services) define special kinds of theft. According to the general definition in section 322 a person steals a thing if he or she takes or converts it fraudulently, without colour of right and with intent to deprive the owner of it, either permanently or temporarily. For the purposes of punishment theft is divided into two separate offences by section 334 depending on the value and nature of the goods stolen. If the thing stolen is worth more than $5000 or is a testamentary instrument the offence is commonly referred to as Theft Over $5000 and is an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment. Where the stolen item is not a testamentary instrument and is not worth more than $5000 it is known as Theft Under $5000 and is a hybrid offence, meaning that it can be treated either as an indictable offence or a less serious summary conviction offence, depending on the choice of the prosecutor. If dealt with as an indictable offence Theft Under $5000 is punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years and, if treated as a summary conviction offence, 6 months imprisonment, a fine of $2000 or both.

Theft in Romania

By the Romanian Penal Code for theft (furt) a person can face a penalty ranging from 1 to 20 years.

Degrees of theft:

A: Theft (1 to 12 years)
When a person steals a thing, or uses a vehicle without permission and no aggravating circumstances applies.

B: Qualified theft (basically 3 to 15 years but there can be special cases when penalty range is from 4 to 18 years and even 10 to 20 years)

• Aggravating circumstances - 3 to 15 years: a) by two or more persons together b) by a person who detains a gun or a narcotic substance c) by a masked or disguised person d) against a person who is in impossibility of self defence e) in a public place f) in a public transportation vehicle g) during the night h) during a natural disaster i) by effraction, or by using an original or copyed key j) things belongs to the cultural patrimonium k) stealing official identity papers with intention to make use of them l) stealing official identity badges with intention to make use of them

• Aggravating circumstances - 4 to 18 years : a) stealing petrol based products directly from transportation pipes and vehicles or deposits b) stealing components from national electrification, telecomunication, irrigation networks or from any type of navigational system c) stealing a public alertation device d) stealing a public intervention vehicle or device e) when periclitating the safety of public transportation.

• Aggravating circumstances - 10 to 20 years : When the consequences are extremely grave and affects some public institutions or the material prejudice is over 2.000.000.000 ROL.

Burglary is a crime related to theft or another crime. It typically involves breaking into a house, outbuilding (such as a shed, stable, or garage), business, school, place of worship, boat, aircraft, rail car, or motor vehicle with an intent to commit a theft or felony. To carry out a burglary is to burgle (British English, a word coined by J.R.R. Tolkien in his 1937 novel The Hobbit as a back-formation of the word burglar, which was then adopted in popular speech) or burglarize (American English). For a summary of the history of this offense, see burglary (history).

It excludes lawful break-ins of property, such as those necessary for rescue of persons or animals, extinguish a fire, lawful searches and seizures by police, confiscation of visible contraband, effecting a lawful arrest, or eviction of a tenant who has failed to meet obligations. It also presumes that the break-in is contrary to the desire of the property owner; a locksmith who picks or destroys a lock to allow entry of the rightful owner or tenant is not a burglar. Furthermore, in the case of a life-threatening situation (such as a storm or fire), someone who takes shelter in another's property is not a burglar.

More precisely, at common law, burglary was the entering of the dwelling house of another in the night time to commit theft. This definition has been greatly expanded in most jurisdictions, so that it no longer need be in the night time and the intent to commit any felony can suffice.

United States

In most jurisdictions in the United States, burglary is a felony and involves trespassing, entering a building or automobile, or remaining unlawfully with intent to commit any felony, not necessarily a theft — for example, vandalism. Thus, a conviction for burglary may qualify as a conviction under a three strikes law or habitual criminal statute. Even if nothing is stolen in a burglary, the act is a statutory offense. Some burglars have rape as an objective, so the crime of burglary is not exclusively a property crime. Burglary may be an essential element in such a crime as arson, kidnapping, identity theft, or violation of civil rights; indeed the "plumbers" of the Watergate scandal were technically burglars. As with all legal definitions in the U.S., the foregoing description may not be applicable in every jurisdiction since there are 51 separate criminal codes in force.

The acts of burglary and any theft that occurs coincident with such entry are treated as separate offenses. If the perpetrator's intended act after entering the burglarized premises was not a felony, the result can be two different misdemeanor charges rather than a felony count. The theft itself might be charged as "(grand or petit) larceny from a building".

The state of Massachusetts formally uses the term "breaking and entering" as well as "burglary".[1]

Many other U.S. states treat burglary as a more serious crime when it occurs at night; California formerly prosecuted night-time burglary as "burglary in the first degree" and daytime burglary as "burglary in the second degree", under most circumstances (this state now uses building type — residential vs. commercial/auto — in making the determination, with residential burglaries carrying the more serious charge). In states that continue to punish night-time burglary more severely than daytime burglary and the crime occurred during twilight, a standard of 30 minutes after sunset or before sunrise will often be observed as the boundary between night and day.

England and Wales

In England and Wales, burglary is dealt with in s9 Theft Act 1968 which provides:

(1)(a) any person who enters as a trespasser, any building or part of a building, inhabited vehicle or vessel with the intent to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or commit criminal damage will be guilty of the offence of burglary.

(1)(b) where any person, having entered any building, part of a building, inhabited vehicle or vessel as a trespasser, commits or attempts to commit a theft or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm.

s9(1)(a) previously included entering with intent to commit rape, but this is now charged as trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence under s63 Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Elements of the offence

Entry as a trespasser

Trespass means that any presence, even partial, on the premises is without the consent of the owner. This requires that the defendant knows the entry to be unlawful. To avoid a conviction, the defendant must prove either that he or she had the owner's consent to be on the premises for the particular purposes, or that the owner would have consented had he or she been aware of all the material circumstances. Thus, if the defendant enters the common part of a shop, there is a licence to be on the premises for the purposes of buying any of the goods on display. But if the defendant goes into a part of the shop which is obviously not intended for common use, or remains within the establishment after closing time without the implicit consent of the store owner or management to commit one of the embedded offences, the test will be whether the defendant honestly believed that the shopkeeper would have consented had he or she been asked. Entering the storeroom and removing inventory, breaking into a display to obtain merchandise within a store fixture might constitute burglary as opposed to the lesser offense of theft. Additionally, in R v Smith and Jones (1976), the Court of Appeal ruled that a trespass could occur if a visitor went beyond the permission granted to him. For example, one who entered a shop intending to steal from it could be held to have entered as a trespasser because by entering intending to steal, they exceeded the licence granted to customers, to enter in order to inspect and purchase goods.

Breaking a store window with a device and then using a device to retrieve merchandise on display and then using another device (such as a shovel or rake) to retrieve the property to be removed would likely constitute a burglary even if no part of the anatomy of the thief passed beyond the window.

Mens rea

Although there may be clear evidence of an intention to steal if the defendant is carrying housebreaking equipment, the specific intent required under s9(1)(a) to inflict GBH, or to cause damage may be difficult to prove if the accused makes no admission. If there are evidential problems, the accused will be charged with the substantive offence or its attempt rather than burglary. One relevant option would be trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence under s63 Sexual Offences Act 2003. If the defendant took a car from a garage and it was later found abandoned, the better charge is TWOC. As a last resort if the accused is interrupted on the premises before committing one of the embedded offences, the least serious offence available to charge would be being found on enclosed premises under s4 Vagrancy Act 1824.

Examples

If the accused breaks a bedroom window and reaches through to remove a valuable ring, or as a customer in a shop, reaches behind the counter to steal money from an assistant's handbag, this would be burglary. Burglary would also include, but not be limited to, theft of a motor vehicle, high way robbery, petty theft, and pickpockets. But prosecutors often prefer charges of theft to avoid having to deal with issues of whether the entry is sufficient or as to beliefs of consent. As an application of the principle of joint enterprise or common purpose, anyone who accompanies the burglar to act as a lookout or to help carry the stolen goods away, will either be a joint principal rather than an accomplice or, in the latter situation, will be handling the stolen goods. Going equipped to steal is a substantive offense if the accused is found in a public place in possession of housebreaking implements.

Burglary is able to be tried either way as a summary offence (before a Magistrate), or on indictment in the Crown Court, and maximum sentences are 10 years for a non-dwelling and 14 years for a dwelling. Once the burglary offence is complete, passing the goods to another would be handling.

Aggravated burglary

Under s10, a burglary becomes aggravated when a burglar has with him at the time a weapon of offence ( i.e could be a rag to tie up a security guard ), imitation firearm, firearm or explosive (W.I.F.E). (There is no requirement that any of these items are used in the commission of the offence; merely that they are in the possession of the burglar at the time.) Aggravated burglary is an indictable only offence, and carries a maximum of life imprisonment.

Time

The defendant must have the firearm, weapon, or explosive at the time of the burglary, namely:

• s9(1)(a) when entering;
• s9(1)(b) when committing the theft, attempted theft, GBH or attempted GBH.

Scotland

Under Scots law in Scotland the crime of burglary is called theft by housebreaking. It does not include any other aspect of burglary. Housebreaking when combined with other crimes is considered acquisitive crime. It is a crime usually prosecuted under solemn procedure.

Canada

Burglars Tools Found in the Bank, printed in 1875 in the Canadian Illustrated News

In Canada, burglary is labeled as "Breaking and Entering" under section 348 of the Criminal Code and is a hybrid offence. Breaking and entering is defined as trespassing with intent to commit an indictable offence.

For the Scheme implementation see Larceny (Scheme implementation).

Template:CrimLaw In the United States, larceny is a common law crime involving theft. Under the common law, larceny is the trespassory asportation and taking of the tangible personal property of another with the intent to deprive him or her of it permanently. In English law, the common law offense was codified into the Larceny Act 1916. In turn, the terminology and substance was converted into theft by the Theft Act 1968.

Larceny in the U.S.

• Trespass limits right of possession—that is, lawful possession prior to the act negates trespass (see embezzlement). Even if the prior owner did not have possession (as in, lost or misplaced), then he is deemed to still have constructive possession. Therefore, if a finder knew or could determine who the owner was, and at the time he found it intended to keep it, then the finder has committed trespass. Generally, however, the law cannot convict a finder unless the property bore some indication it belonged to somebody, and the finder intended to keep it at the time of the finding. (Model Penal Code sec. 223.5)

• Asportation and taking involve physical movement of the property. That is, if the property is not moved, then there is no larceny. Furthermore, if a person ("Alice") tells the other ("Bob") that the item is hers (Alice's), then authorizes Bob to take it, and Bob takes off with it, it is Alice whom the law deems to have asported—because Bob is protected by the fiction of innocent agency. Taking is typically defined as exercising control and dominion over the property.

Larceny under common law is never applied to real property (land), or services. However, in the U.S., the Model Penal Code (MPC) states that services can be the subject of theft. Wild animals (ferae naturae) are deemed to not be the property of the owner of whatever land they are found on, so takings of wild animals are also not subject to larceny.

One can only "steal" one's own property when another has a better right to possession at the relevant time. Larceny is a crime of possession, not ownership. Thus, if a vehicle is under the possession of a mechanic, and the owner takes the vehicle, he could be guilty of larceny.

• The intent required is that one intended to deprive the possessor of the property "permanently". Courts have held that "permanence" is not simply keeping forever; it can include the intent to deprive the possessor of economic significance, even if there are plans to return the property later. Although the mens rea of larceny is the intent to steal, the focus is on the loss to the possessor, not the gain to the defendant. Thus, even if the thief did not gain in the taking, it could still be classed as larceny if the possessor lost in the process. Further, the mens rea and actus reus must coincide. If one rents a car with intent to return, then decides to keep it, then there is no larceny (see embezzlement).

In most of the United States the common law definitions of certain crimes have been modified. Quite often the general crime of theft has replaced larceny, and most related common law and statutory crimes such as embezzlement, false pretenses, robbery, and receipt of stolen property.

• Larceny by Trick or Deception occurs when the victim of larceny is tricked by a misrepresentation of fact into giving up possession of property. This should not be confused with false pretenses, where the victim is tricked into giving up title to the property. However in New York State this class of larceny is broken down in statutes into two types.
  • Larceny by False Promise refers to where someone obtains property in exchange for a promise to do something when the person making the promise does not intend to fulfill that promise. An example would be A taking a down payment for doing work for B, and then A takes the money and runs off to the Bahamas with no intention to ever do the work.
  • Larceny by false pretenses refers to obtaining property by misrepresenting facts relating to the promise. Here, an example would be where A offers to sell his car to B when A does not actually own the car.

• Grand larceny is typically defined as larceny of a significant amount of property, in some cases, it can be less. In the U.S., it is often defined as an amount valued at $200 or more. In New York, Grand Larceny refers to amounts of $1000 or more. Grand larceny is often classified as a felony with the concomitant possibility of a harsher sentence. Sometimes, the crime can be considered serious even for trivial theft. For example, in Virginia, petit larceny (a misdemeanor) occurs when the amount stolen is less than $5.00, if taken from the person (e.g. pickpocketing or robbery), or less than $200 if not taken from the person (e.g., stealing someone's property) . Grand Larceny (a felony) occurs for a theft of only $5.00 or more from a person, or more than $200 if not taken from the person.The same penalty applies for stealing checks as for cash or other valuables.

According to the general statutes some states such as North Carolina have no formal Charge of Grand Larceny. There is however Felonious Larceny which is defined the same as Grand Larceny.

In the PBS kids' series, Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (game show), one of Carmen's gang members was a blonde-haired girl named Patty Larceny.

For the 1967 film, see Robbery (film).

"Holdup" redirects here.

"Robbers" redirects here.

Template:EngCrimLaw

Ronin robbing a merchant's house in Japan around 1860 (1)

Robbery is the crime of seizing property through violence or intimidation. More precisely, at common law, robbery was defined as taking the property of another, with the intent to permanently deprive the person of that property, by means of force or fear. It should be noted, in common with most legal terms, the precise definition of robbery varies between jurisdictions. Robbery is also when there is forced intimidation placed upon the victim/victims.

Common issues in differentiating robbery from simple theft is the degree of force required and when the force is applied. For example, in a purse snatch the thief takes a purse off his victim shoulder. The victim might not have noticed. The question as to whether this is an example of robbery or theft is not clear. What if, in pulling the purse the victim is pulled to the ground, but still does not have time to offer resistance? Or if the purse strap is cut by the thief with a knife? The answers to these questions will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

The element of force differentiates robbery from embezzlement, larceny, and other types of theft. Piracy (robbery at sea) is a type of robbery. Armed robbery involves the use of a weapon. Aggravated robbery involves the use of a deadly weapon or something that appears to be a deadly weapon. Highway robbery or "Mugging" takes place outside and in a public place such as a sidewalk, street, or parking lot. Carjacking is the act of stealing a car from a victim by force.

Informally, robbery may be used to denote other kinds of theft that are not robbery, such as burglary. People returning home and finding their possessions stolen may well exclaim, "We've been robbed!", though actually they've been burgled.

English law

Under section 8(1) of the Theft Act 1968, robbery is an indictable only offence which occurs if the defendant:

steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.

The elements of the offence are:

Steals

This requires evidence to prove a theft as set out in s.1(1) Theft Act, 1968.

Actual or threatened force against the person

The threat or use of force must take place immediately before or at the time of the theft intentionally or recklessly to facilitate it. Force used after the actus reus is complete may only constitute threatening behaviour, assault, assault with intent to rob or another offence against the person, depending on the individual circumstances.

Puts or seeks to put anyone in fear

The threat or use of force against the person must be made immediately before or at the time of the theft and for the purpose of facilitating it. Where threats of force are used they must amount to threats of then and there subjecting the victim, or some other person to force.

A robbery would be committed if a mugger forcibly snatched a mobile phone or pulled out a knife to imply a threat of violence to the owner and then took the phone from him. If, however, the defendant simply cut the strap of a bag carried over the shoulder by the victim, this would not constitute robbery unless the victim was in fear. It is important to note that the victim of the theft need not be the person who is threatened or assaulted.

A robbery would also be committed where a robber stole from a jewellers by threatening to assault a customer visiting the shop as a means of forcing the jeweller to handover his stock. As the definition states, any threats must be live - then and there - as any threat for the future "I'll beat you tomorrow if you don't give me your watch" does not have the immediacy required for this offence to be complete, although it might constitute an offence of blackmail or extortion.

Similarly, the threatening of damage to property, no matter how valuable, will not constitute a robbery, but may (depending on the other requirements of that offence) disclose an offence of blackmail, extortion or threats to criminal damage.

In circumstances where the property taken as a result of the threats or force is a conveyance, and if there is insufficient evidence to prove the theft element (the thief abandons the vehicle shortly afterwards and maintains the taking of the vehicle was merely to escape the scene and he had no intention to permanently deprive), then an offence of taking a conveyance without consent would be charged under section 12 as a TWOC.

Property stolen during a robbery remains stolen and thus its disposal or realisation etc. will still constitute an offence of handling stolen property.

Following R v Mitchell (2005) AER (D) 74, the sentencing guidelines provided in Attorney General's References (Nos 4 and 7 of 2002) (2002) EWCA Crim 127 no longer apply to street robbery involving the use of guns for which more severe deterrent sentences will almost invariably be required. In November 2005, the Sentencing Guidelines Council [2] issued new draft guidelines concerning robbery, but they are not yet in force.

Assault with intent to rob

File:Lampiao.jpg

Lampião, the most famous bandit (turned into popular myth) of Brazilian Cangaço

An alternative offence under s8(2) of the 1968 Act is assault, i.e. any act which intentionally or recklessly causes another to fear the immediate and unlawful use of force, with an intention to rob. So this offence is an option instead of charging an attempt if the defendant is unsuccessful in his or her attempt to steal, but uses or threatens the use of force.

Sentence

The maximum sentence is life imprisonment. Robbery and assault with intent to rob are also subject to the mandatory sentencing regime under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Etymology

The word "rob" came via French from Late Latin words (e.g. deraubare) of Germanic origin, from Common Germanic raub- = "clothes", as in old times (before modern cheap mechanized mass production of clothes) one main target of robbers was often the victim's clothes.

During the English Civil War, Cromwell's supporters castigated Prince Rupert by calling him "Prince Robber".

Bank robbery is the crime of robbing a bank. It is also called Bank Heist especially in the United States. It is usually accomplished by a solitary criminal who brandishes a firearm at a teller and demands money, either orally or through a written note. The most dangerous type of bank robbery is a takeover robbery in which several heavily armed (and armored) gang members threaten the lives of everyone present in the bank. A bank robbery can also take place during off hours when thieves try to break into the vault and get away with money.

According to the Independence Hall Association in Philadelphia, the first bank robbery in America happened during the night of August 31 or the early morning of September 1 1798 at the Bank of Pennsylvania at Carpenters' Hall. The vaults were apparently robbed of $162,821, or approximately $1.8 million in 2006 dollars. Because no forced entry evidence existed, authorities assumed it was an "inside" job. Several suspects were immediately imprisoned and prosecuted, but the real culprits were Isaac Davis and a partner. Within days of the heist, Davis' partner fell victim to a plague of yellow fever that ravaged Philadelphia that summer.

(Claims of notoriety aside, it is important to note that theft which lacks intimidation or threat of violent confrontation is not truly a robbery, but a burglary. These two concepts are often confused in common discussion of bank crimes.)

During the American Civil War, raiders from both Union and Confederate armies would rob banks in enemy-controlled towns. These robberies were at the time regarded as legitimate acts of war, but many of the raiders carried on robbing banks in the post-war era, giving rise to the famous robber gangs of the late 19th century.

Due to modern security measures like security cameras, armed security guards, silent alarms, exploding dye packs, and SWAT teams, bank robberies are now much more difficult. Few criminals are able to make a successful living out of bank robbery over the long run, since each attempt increases the probability that they will be identified and caught. Today most organized crime groups tend to make their money by other means, such as drug trafficking, gambling, loan sharking, identity theft, or online scamming and phishing. Bank robberies are still fairly common and are indeed successful, although eventually many bank robbers are found and arrested. A report by the Federal Bureau of Investigation [3] states that, among Category I serious crimes, the arrest rate for bank robbery in 2001 was second only to that of murder.

A further factor making bank robbery unattractive for criminals in the United States is the severity with which it is prosecuted. Accounts at all US banks are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a corporation of the federal government, bringing bank robbery under federal jurisdiction and involving the FBI. Federal sentencing guidelines for bank robbery mandate long prison terms, which are usually further enhanced by the use or carrying of loaded firearms, prior criminal convictions, and the absence of parole from the federal prison system. As with any type of robbery, the fact that bank robbery is also inherently a violent crime typically causes corrections administrators to place imprisoned bank robbers in harsher high-security institutions.

Ever since the "glory days" of the great bank robberies during the 19th century, bank robberies have become ingrained into American popular culture. Numerous films, books, and songs have been written about the crime, which is the crime of choice for villains everywhere in comic books, pulp adventure and crime stories, and even cartoons. The incidence of bank robberies is less pronounced in many other countries despite less security. It is believed that the cultural differences may be the reason.

Mugging is a type of theft, in which the perpetrator (the mugger) accosts the victim in a public place, such as a sidewalk, street or parking lot, and demands money and/or valuables through the use of force or fear. The thief will typically threaten to use a weapon such as a gun or knife.

The crime of mugging and its history

The term 'mugging' gained its current popularity in the United States, with New York infamously described in the 1970s as 'the mugging capital of America'. However, the crime is as old as history and among other things has been known as highway robbery, purse-snatching, or footpadding (which could be surreptitious or violent). In Victorian times the targets were wallets and gold watches, but in the US there was a big increase in reported street robberies and handbag snatches from the 1960s onwards as new consumer items became popular. In England the fashion for mugging either arose or gained popularity through many social factors in the late seventies and eighties, and became a cultural phenomenon among some urban youths. In some cultures, there was perceived to be a growing tendency for young males to steal from other young males. The principal targets became valuable and popular accessories like portable audio devices, cameras, laptop computers, mobile phones, and other items that can be quickly and easily resold. Excitement, status, and gang initiation are undoubtedly important motives too. In larger United States cities and in the United Kingdom, the news media report and cover muggings as a crime trend, and some observers blamed the news media for a moral panic in England from the early 1970s at a time when “newspaper reporting of mugging(s) emerged and became increasingly sensational” Nonetheless, as recorded crime statistics, insurance claims, and national crime surveys all show, street robberies remained a growing problem until they peaked at about the turn of the millennium.

Such robberies can involve the threat and/or use of weapons and/or violence. Most mugging victims are uninjured or suffer minor injuries. However, in some cases victims die from heart attack or stroke when they struggle with assailants,^{[citation needed]} through falling from moving buses or under vehicles, being knocked to the ground and hitting their heads on the sidewalk, being stabbed with edged weapons or shot with firearms, or beaten with blunt force. More frequently than death, mugging victims sustain lifetime dermatological scarring, facial, cranial, and maxillofacial trauma as well as orthopedic injuries which affect some level of disability, and impact labor and life activities.

Risk factors for victimization

• Conspicuous display by sidewalk pedestrians of resellable consumer items or indications thereof such as white iPod headphones.
• Preoccupation of sidewalk pedestrians by certain activities such as talking on a mobile phone. This activity is seen as a particular risk factor because the victim is distracted by the conversation, typically has compromised hearing and peripheral vision, and is conspicuously displaying a resellable item that can be quickly and easily converted to cash.

Mugger Modus Operandi

Some muggers operate alone. Others work sidewalks as a group of assailants, that many refer to as a wolf-pack^{[citation needed]} due to the similarities to canine behavior and hunting technique. The wolf-pack technique serves multiple purposes. At the moment of the incident the presence of multiple assailants first deters a solo victim from physically retaliating. Several wolf-pack muggers dressed substantially similar can confuse a victim from making proper suspect identification at a police lineup if the perpetrators are arrested. Following the incident, several wolf-pack muggers dressed substantially similar can also split up stolen merchandise and travel in different directions following their crimes to avoid police identification and arrest.

In many United States cities, muggers wear disguises integrated into clothing and accessories, such as hooded sweatshirts or hoodies. Others wear gradient lens glasses or stunner shades as a nighttime fashion accessory. Caps, and hats also serve as a change of disguise. As of 2006 and 2007, ski masks and balaclavas are making a comeback as a popular fashion accessory in some circles.^{[citation needed]} As a basic operations technique, muggers attempt to blend into their surroundings as much as possible to avoid police detection following their crimes. To this extent many wear the local clothing style de-jour. To the extent to which most other persons in their age group wear jeans, the mugger will also wear jeans, if most others wear white t-shirts and caps, the mugger will also wear such clothing to blend in and frustrate efforts to identify them. Most muggers that carry handguns will wear baggy and oversize clothing to avoid their gun "printing" through their clothing. 4XXL and 6XXL T-Shirts are not an uncommon size for a lean young mugger to wear to avoid having a gun print through his clothes. Many muggers will wear large jackets for the large pockets they feature to conceal stolen pocketbooks and other stolen personal items. Backpacks and "shopping" bags can also serve to conceal a purse until it can be ransacked, plundered, and ditched several blocks from the site of the mugging.

Most muggers prefer dark areas as they serve the dual purpose of providing cover so that police and passerby will not notice their crimes. The dark lighting also serves to mitigate the victims ability to observe and remember the mugger for later positive identification. Some muggers will kill their victims if they resist or attempt to resist the mugging.

Victim countermeasures

As self-defense measures, many victims carry powerful whistles, bright flashlights, to call attention to themselves. In some countries, others carry and train to use knives and other edged weapons and concealed handguns, as equalizers against younger, larger, and more physically powerful muggers. Others train in the martial arts to use their bodies as powerful self-defense weapons capable of deadly force if necessary to overcome a mugger. Still others focus on running and sprinting training and wear appropriate running shoes at all times^{[citation needed]} to outrun muggers.

A less recognized choice many make is their place of residence, shopping, and business. They choose to live in a safer area to decrease their risk of being mugged this way. Many also choose a method of transportation that minimizes the possibility of mugging. Many urban dwellers ride bicycles to avoid being mugged while walking among other purposes. Others believe private cars will protect them.

Law enforcement abatement strategies

In the United States many law enforcement agencies routinely conduct robbery surveillance operations often involving undercover police officers posing as decoys. In the United Kingdom, surveillance cameras monitoring public areas are more common than in the United States and are in part intended to have a deterrent effect.

Criminal prosecution

In many of the United States, mugging or street robbery is generally legally considered to be the felonious taking of money, personal property, or any other article of value, in the possession of another, from his person, or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear. A person is also generally guilty of robbery if in the course of committing a theft, he inflicts serious bodily injury upon another or threatens another with serious bodily injury.

In many of the United States muggings or street robberies are prosecuted as felonies with penalties of victim restitution and incarceration, with lifetime incarceration, without parole, for the third felony conviction pursuant to the three strikes laws.

Popular culture

• In the film Flower Drum Song, the only part for a caucasian is that of a mugger, symbolizing one aspect of American values.
• The third episode of television series Flight of the Conchords is themed around mugging.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Theft  ^history
• Burglary  ^history
• Larceny  ^history
• Robbery  ^history
• Bank_Robbery  ^history
• Mugging_(Robbery)  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Theft"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.