Banksy's graffiti: A not-so-simple case of criminal damage?

Edwards, Ian (2009) Banksy's graffiti: A not-so-simple case of criminal damage? The Journal of Criminal Law, 73 (4). pp. 345-361. ISSN 0022-0183

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)


Graffiti artists are, if caught, most likely to be prosecuted under s. 1 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971. This article explores the extent to which the substantive definition of criminal damage applies to them. There is no separate exculpatory or justificatory defence of ‘aesthetic value’, and so graffiti artists must argue that they either have not ‘damaged’ property, they lacked mens rea or they had lawful excuse. It is argued that the work of artists such as Banksy forces a reappraisal of the precision and applicability of criminal damage.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: sdg 16 - peace, justice and strong institutions ,/dk/atira/pure/sustainabledevelopmentgoals/peace_justice_and_strong_institutions
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Social Sciences > School of Law
Depositing User: Julie Frith
Date Deposited: 16 Nov 2010 09:22
Last Modified: 06 Jan 2023 10:32
DOI: 10.1350/jcla.2009.73.4.583

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item