Fai and Ming have committed theft and burglary. They will most likely be charged with the offence of burglary. Burglary more appropriately reflects their criminal conduct in this case scenario.
Theft is an offence contrary to Section 9 of the Theft Ordinance (Chapter 210), Laws of Hong Kong. A person commits theft if he or she dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving that other of it.
Burglary is an offence contrary to Section 11 of the Theft Ordinance (Chapter 210). burglary is committed where a person enters a building or a part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal (or to commit certain other specified offences) or, having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser, steals or attempts to steal anything in the building (or commits certain other specified offences).
Burglary is generally regarded as more serious than theft. The main difference between the two offences is that theft can be committed anywhere, for example stealing from someone in a street, whereas burglary can only be committed in a building or in a part of a building and the entry was without permission. For more detailed explanations of the elements of these two offences, please click here.
Fai and Ming have dishonestly appropriated property belonging to another by taking items from the Principal’s Office. The items taken were lawfully in the possession of the school. Fai and Ming’s conduct in going back to the school on a Sunday, sneaking into the Principal’s Office and taking property which did not belong to them shows they knew they had no permission to take the items, they knew they were acting dishonestly and that they intended to take the items away from the school permanently. All the requirements of theft are satisfied.
The items were taken from the Principal’s Office. That office is part of the school building. However it is a room that pupils can only enter with permission and for a lawful purpose. There is nothing to suggest that Fai and Ming had permission to enter. Their entry to the Principal’s Office was not for a lawful purpose. They intended to steal from the Principal’s Office and they did steal.
Because they had no permission or lawful right to enter the Principal’s Office for the purpose of stealing items from the office, they were trespassing. They have entered into a part of a building with intent to steal and have committed theft inside that part of the building. The correct charge would therefore be burglary.