KembaraXtra-Case Law- R v Harry (1974)

​Topic: Blackmail & the Definition of "Menace"
I. Factual Background:
Defendant (D): Harry, treasurer of a college rag committee.
Action: Sent letters to 115 local shopkeepers.
Request: Buy indemnity posters for £1.50 (donation to charity).
Purpose (Implied): Protection from further "rag activity".
Reaction:
Some shopkeepers complained.
Local Board of Trade: Letter was "ill-conceived" but not serious.
Charge: Blackmail.
II. Legal Issue:

Was there a "menace" present in Harry's actions sufficient to constitute blackmail?
III. Held (Court's Decision):

No menace was established.
Reasoning: The relatively few complaints suggested that the letter did not constitute a sufficient threat or intimidation.
Key Quote (Per Petre J): "'Menaces' is a strong word. You may think that menaces must be of a fairly strong nature to fall within the definition."
IV. Significance/Key Takeaways:

Definition of Menace: The court emphasized that a "menace" must be of a "fairly strong nature" to fall under the definition relevant to blackmail. A mere inconvenience or annoyance is insufficient.
Evidence of Menace: The number of complaints (or lack thereof) can be a factor in determining whether a menace existed. The context is important.
Common Sense Approach: The court took a "common sense view" to assess whether the actions constituted blackmail.