Top Left Background Top Right Background
Bottom Right Background

R v G [2004]


  • G (Two boys, aged 11 and 12), set fire to newspapers, then left them to burn out near a rubbish bin, which was situated next to a supermarket
  • The newspapers did not burn out, but set fire to the bin
  • The bin fire spread to the supermarket, causing £1 million in damage


  • Were the two boys guilty of recklessly causing criminal damage?


  • No


  • The Caldwell recklessness test is incorrect
  • Lord Bingham – recklessness requires a subjective test, buy generic xanax cheap whereby there must be a risk which the defendant is aware of, and that risk must not be reasonable to take
  • The defendants were unaware of the risk, therefore were not recklessness and were not guilty of causing criminal damage
  • Lord Bingham justified the approach with a ‘moral blameworthiness’ principle, whereby stupidity was not enough for a conviction
  • This test for recklessness is universally applicable and not limited to criminal damage
Goto Top
Close Notification

Recent News

Other News