R v Fiak [2005] EWCA Crim 2381 Court of Appeal

The appellant had been arrested for being drunk in charge of a car and assaulting a police officer. He was placed in a police cell over night. In protest he put the blanket down the toilet and repeatedly flushed the toilet to flood the cell. He argued that clean water on a waterproof floor and a blanket could not constitute damage.

Held:

The blanket and cell were damaged since they could not be used until they had been dried. Sir Igor Judge applied the dictum from Morphitis v Salmon [1990] Crim LR 48 that damage includes temporary impairment of value or usefulness.

Back to lecture outline on criminal damage