WHEN DOES ABUSE OF TRUST TURN THEFT INTO A MORE SERIOUS OFFENSE?

The crime of stealing an item unlawfully is punishable by the law since it infringes the rights of property and possession. Theft in the majority of cases is a situation when one individual steals some personal property of another without the other person’s permission and with the aim of earning something. Nevertheless, some situations can result in the crime being more severe and cause a harsher punishment.

In Article 310 of the revised penal code, theft is classified as qualified theft where it is done under circumstances that show the more high level of betrayal or social ill. The misuse of trust or confidence vested on the thief is one of the most prevalent situations that constitutes theft.

Most relationships usually involve trust among employer and employees, relatives, guardians or those who are given property. When one tries to use this trust to illegally steal property the law punishes it in a worse way since it concerns not only the property stealing but the breach of trust as well.

The law takes theft to be more severe when it is done under the following circumstances:

1. Theft by Domestic Servant – This is committed when an individual that is in employment in a household steals property of the employer or individuals in the household. The crime is aggravated since the domestic service is characterized by personal trust.

2. Grave abuse of Confidence – In the cases where the offender abuses a relationship of trust or responsibility so as to steal property. This is typical situations whereby a person trusted by property or access to property abuses that trust to steal the property.

3. Theft of a Specific Kind of Property – The law also places a high emphasis on theft of specific types of property such as motor vehicles, mail letter, or huge cattle as they have societal or economic value.

4. Theft in Calamities or Emergencies – Stealing is also classed as qualified theft which is during fire, flood, earthquake, typhoons or other calamities in which the victims are at a disadvantage.

Such conditions make the crime a qualified theft as it is either through violation of trust or a case where the offender exploits special conditions. Consequently, the punishment spelt out by the law becomes harsher.

The interpretation of the difference between theft and qualified theft introduces the point in which the law is focused on trust and social responsibility. The legal framework in the event of qualified theft is geared towards discouraging those who take advantage of the circumstances and the trust of others to their own advantage.