comsuc down again?, page-30

re: grant - comsuc down again?but what? Hi Ridge,

On the wider theft arguments, yes, I agree. On the conversion argument, however, the person would still be gone (after all, why do it in the first place). Mind you, it would be for the Prosecution to prove intention. The Defence could counter by arguing innocent mistake (as evidenced by immediately surrendering the proceeds, etc). The Prosecution would then argue that the correct course of action should have been to either leave the shares untouched, or to report the matter back to the on-line broker.

It would be at this particular point that the Defence's argument would break down because the following steps would all be involved in executing the on-line order (all of which go to evidencing intention):
1)
open to portfolio holdings;
2)
click specifically to the ANZ holding;
3)
then click on "sell" and open to a new page;
4)
then enter the amount to be "sold";
5)
then enter the "selling price", or select "market";
6)
then hit "enter" which would then open to a confirming page (ie: sumamrising the details of the proposed trade);
7)
enter the authorising password and again hit enter.

At each of the points, 1) through 6), you have the ability to exit (ie: retrieve the situation). However, at 7), you will have knowingly known what you were doing (ie: the summarised trade, all selling details entered, and password authority entered and executed).

From 1) through to 6), you may be charged with "attempt". But, once you have passed through 7), the charge would be fraudulent conversion.