MPs' expenses: theft act explained
Updated on 05 February 2010
As MPs Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine, plus peer Lord Hanningfield face criminal charges over their expenses claims, here is a closer look at the theft act which they stand accused of breaching.
Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer said the four politicians would be charged with breaking section 17 of the Theft Act 1968.
The act states:
A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
Section 17 focuses on criminal suspects who falsify documents and records with a view to making a gain, financially or otherwise.
The act defines this as when a person:
(a) destroys, defaces, conceals or falsifies any account or any record or document made or required for any accounting purpose
or
(b) in furnishing information for any purpose produces or makes use of any account, or any such record or document as aforesaid, which to his knowledge is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular
The law says anyone convicted under this section of the act could be jailed for up to seven years by a crown court judge.
In the coming days the accused four will receive formal summonses ordering them to appear at City of Westminster magistrates' court next month.
