Handling Stolen Goodsvolume 2

Handling Stolen GoodsVolume 2

275.6Burglary, Proceeds of

R v Stockbridge and Prout 2012 EWCA Crim 1784 D pleaded (full credit) to handling. Two burglaries were committed in which valuable jewellery and other items were stolen. Some diamond studded rings were worth around £2,000 each. A laptop was stolen containing a lot of information that the householder needed. €300-400 were stolen from the second property. D was found with Euros and various items of jewellery on his person. The first householder identified some of the jewellery and said the Euros could be hers or the second victim’s. The bulk of the property stolen was never recovered. D, aged 34, had 34 convictions for 84 offences, the majority of which were for burglary of both dwellings and non-dwellings. He also had convictions for handling in 1996, 1997, 1998, 2003 (×2) and 2007[1] (×2). In 2011 he received 18 months for conspiracy to conceal etc. criminal property. Held. A starting point of 3 years was too high in light of the property he was handling and the value of that property. It was appropriate to start at 27 months. With the plea, 18 months, not 2 years.

275.10Monetary value£1,000-£100,000

R v Daniels and Smith 2012 EWCA Crim 532, 2 Cr App R (S) 89 (p 532)D and S pleaded to handling stolen goods on the day of trial. They were stopped by police in a van towing a trailer carrying a JCB grab attachment. They appeared nervous and so the officer inspected the trailer. The equipment had no identification marker plate. It was subsequently discovered that the grab attachment had been stolen from a nearby site, where it was on hire. It was worth £17,000. D’s basis of plea stated he was to receive £150 to take the grab attachment to a scrap yard, believing it to be stolen. S stated that he was asked by D to lend his trailer in order to transport the grab attachment. Although S believed the grab to be stolen, he had no knowledge of how it came to be at D’s address. D, aged 39, had 32 convictions since 1987, including theft and handling (×2) in 2004 and 2009. S, aged 31, had five convictions including one for handling in 2007, theft and attempted theft. Held. This was professional in nature and involved goods of significant value. Both had convictions for handling and had involved themselves in a venture which was obviously one of commercial dishonesty on a significant scale. For D, 16 months not 30 and for S, 12 months not 2 years.

R v Gasiunas 2012 EWCA Crim 1753 LCJ D was convicted of handling stolen goods (×5). After a charity worker noticed some suspicious activity relating to charity bags being loaded onto a lorry in a yard the police attended the yard and stopped the operation. They recovered bags containing clothing belonging to the Salvation Army, NSPCC, British Heart Foundation and the PDSA. The value of the NSPCC bags was around £3,000. A value could not be placed on the other clothing. D, aged 28 at appeal was of Polish origin and treated as good character. Held. This was a fraud on the donors, the charities and on the intended beneficiaries. A deterrent sentence was called for. It could not be shown that D was closely tied with whoever went around stealing the bags from people’s doorsteps. The appropriate sentence was 2 years not 3.

275.11Monetary valueOver £1,000

R v Poulton and Others 2011 EWCA Crim 2705, 2012 1 Cr App R (S) 96 (p 580) F pleaded to conspiracy to handle (×2) (full credit), W pleaded to conspiracy to handle, J pleaded to conspiracy to handle and supply of cocaine (both full credit) and P pleaded to handling (×3). There was a large-scale undercover police operation surveilling individuals involved in a conspiracy to handle primarily high-value cars stolen as a result of dwelling and commercial burglaries. The aggregate of the property value was over £500,000, however it was sold for less than that. F, W, J and P were the principals in the conspiracy. W met with an undercover officer and provided details of how the cars could be supplied for good prices, and the in-built tracking devices dismantled. Between June 2009 and October 2010, 14 cars, one digger, £12,000 worth of designer clothes, a dumper truck and a generator were sold to the undercover officers for £20,660. The actual value was around £240,000. Between June and October 2010, F met with undercover officers and agreed to supply stolen cars for a better price than P had offered. F supplied 10 stolen cars totaling £274,000 for £8,850. An officer met J during these dealings and asked about the supply of drugs. J subsequently supplied one gram of cocaine (36% purity). F had 11 convictions for 27 offences, mostly for theft, burglary and handling. W had two convictions for criminal damage and willful obstruction (1988), and evading duty (1998). J, aged 20 when entering his plea, had convictions for handling and possessing a prohibited weapon. P had five convictions for nine offences between 2006 and 2010, the majority of which were for theft and handling. Held. F enjoyed a lavish lifestyle and was involved in both conspiracies and was head of the operation. J was involved for nearly 12 months. W actually only supplied four vehicles and was not an organiser or ringleader. P’s offences came to an aggregate of just over £40,000. He delivered two cars and took payment for them. This was a serious case of organised crime with aggravating features present. We start at 12 years. For F, the ‘head’, 8 years not 10. For J, starting at 6 because of his age and plea, 4 years for the conspiracy and 3 years consecutive for the drugs making 7 years detention, not 10. For W, 4 years not 6. For P, the Judge was wrong to regard him as a trusted lieutenant. So, 16 months not 3 years.

*275.11aMonetary value over £1m

R v Noorullah 2012 EWCA Crim 1643, 2 Cr App R (S) 97 (p 547) D was convicted of handling stolen goods. He was a former registered pharmacist, who had been struck off the register in 1998, because of his previous convictions. From 2005,he rented commercial premises in Yorkshire and was named in the wholesale dealer’s licence which was issued to his company. When the premises were inspected in 2007, stolen tablets were discovered. They had been stolen in 2005 and had a resale value of £1.1m. D’s account was that Z approached him and asked to store the tablets before Z shipped them to Iran. D claimed he was to receive no financial reward, but did seek to further his business links with Z. The purchaser was a company specialising in the pursuit of counterfeit goods, posing as a buyer. There was no evidence that D was involved in the theft. D had a number of convictions between 1992 and 1998 for low value dishonesty offences. In 2002 there was a French conviction for using stolen credit cards some French driving convictions and in 2006 two common assaults. Held. D was the warehouseman and a facilitator of others, even if not involved in the sale of the goods. The Court was entitled to form the view that, as D knew the goods were for sale outside of the EU, he was aware of the credibility his premises would add to the sale. The fee for storing the goods must have been substantial. D’s poor health added to the mitigation. 4 years was not manifestly excessive.

For more detail see

[1] It is assumed that ‘1997’ in the report should read 2007, as the convictions are listed in chronological order. Ed.