There are also a range of offences related to spray paint cans found in ss 7-9 GCA.
20.
See R v Wallis 5 TR 375, 379; 101 ER 210, 212. Interestingly, also a case involving the word ‘places’. In this case ' “places,” in the Act only extends to offices in places of the same kind with those enumerated' at 212. In this instance ‘places’ had a different meaning from that presently under discussion (in itself revealing the general nature of ‘places’ and its multiple possible meanings) and was read in line with the preceding words of ‘cities, towns corporate, boroughs and places’ in the Assize of Fuel Act 1710 (9 Ann C 20).
21.
This makes it irrelevant that chalk crossings are generally made without seeking consent from the local council. There are, however, instances where creators of chalk crossings have obtained a street art permit: See, eg, HabibRashell, “Ashfeld Council hoses DIY chalk rainbow crossing after giving permission”Inner West Courier (Sydney), April 18, 2013
22.
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 195.
23.
In terms of mental state, damaging property may be easier to prove because while graffiti requires intentional damage or defacement damaging property is satisfied with either intentional or reckless infliction of damage: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 195.
24.
Magee v Delaney [2012] VSC 407.
25.
Samuels v Stubbs (1972) 4SASR200.
26.
Ibid203.
27.
Ibid.
28.
Hardman & Others v The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary [1986] Crim LR330.
29.
SmithJohn, Commentary on Hardman and Others v The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary [1986] Crim LR330, 331.
30.
Ibid.
31.
Roe v Kingerlee [1986] Crim LR 735.
32.
R v Zischke [1983] 1 Qd R 240.
33.
Ibid246.
34.
R v Previsic [2008] VSCA112 [11].
35.
Hammond v R [2013] NSWCCA93 at [69].
36.
Ibid [73]. In this case the seat could be cleaned by wiping with a damp cloth in the course of otherwise routine cleaning or through a ‘reasonable attempt at cleaning’. The trial judge did not find a need for professional cleaning or to spend specific funds on cleaning or any level of difficulty, effort or inconvenience beyond what was necessary as part of routine cleaning and thus there was no indication of any interference with the function of the seat at [74].
37.
Sharpe, above n 18.
38.
Ibid.
39.
Magee v Delaney [2012] VSC407 at [97], [128], [153].
40.
WhiteRob, ‘Graffiti Crime Prevention & Cultural Space’ (2001) 12(3) Current Issues in Criminal Justice253. See also HalseyMarkYoungAlison, ‘The Meanings of Graffiti and Municipal Administration’ (2002) 35ANZ Journal of Criminology165, noting the problematic tendency of academic writers and policy makers to see graffiti as ‘a relatively homogenous and somewhat simplistic phenomenon’.
41.
IvesonKurt, Publics and the City (Blackwell, 2007), 114.
MatruglioTania, ‘Graffiti Vandalism in NSW Crime Prevention Issues, No 3 (NSW AGD) November 2008, 4. Interestingly, Iveson points out ‘the graffiti prevention and removal business is now also a lucrative multi-million-dollar industry in Sydney’, above n 41, 133.
47.
Matruglio, above n 46, 2.
48.
Hardman & Others v The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary [1986] Crim LR 330.
49.
Magee v Delaney [2012] VSC407.
50.
Hammond v R [2013] NSWCCA93.
51.
NSW AG&J, above n 44.
52.
Iveson, above n 41, 116
53.
WilsonJames, Thinking about Crime (Basic Books, 1985) 78–9.
54.
White, above n 40, 258.
55.
Iveson, above n 41, 116.
56.
Ibid116–7.
57.
NSW AG&J, above n 44.
58.
A study of chalk dust in a classroom found a low risk of harm, MajumdarDeepanjan, ‘Assessment of Airborne Fine Particulate Matter and Particle Size Distribution in Settled Chalk Dust’ (2011) Indoor & Built Environment1, 9.
59.
HalseyYoung, above n 40.
60.
White, above n 40, 256.
61.
HalseyMarkPederickBen, The game of fame: Mural, graffiti, erasure’ (2010) 14City82, 90.
