Proof beyond reasonable doubt — unlawfully taking a motor vehicle — aggravated robbery — elements of aggravated robbery — Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 — Crimes Act 1961, s 234 — R v Butler CA 384/00 7 December 2000. The young person, BG, faced one charge of unlawfully taking a motor vehicle and one of aggravated robbery. It was alleged BG and a group of associates took a car from a local carpark and drove it to a store. They then disguised their faces, entered the store with a pole and proceeded to steal cigarettes. The burden lay on the Crown to prove beyond reasonable doubt that BG was one of the people who had stolen the car and participated in the robbery. Counsel for BG submitted that on the facts aggravated robbery could not be established as the storekeeper had retreated before any physical violence had been inflicted. Principal Youth Court Judge Walker referred to R v Butler which stated sufficient implied threat can be found from inherently violent circumstances. In this case, a group of masked people with a pole had confronted one storekeeper who fled, fearing for her safety. A threat of violence was used to overcome resistance to goods being stolen. The charge could be made out. The remaining issue was whether it could be proved BG was involved. Police found BG's fingerprint on the driver door and a search of his home revealed clothing that matched the outfit of an offender captured by CCTV. This evidence was deemed sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that BG was guilty of the offending. A family group conference was scheduled to decide what the next step was for the young person. Judgment Date: 16 November 2018. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *