NOT a point to prove for theft?

• A. ownership of the item
• B. dishonesty
• C. property belonging to someone else
• D. with intention to permanently deprive

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is the elements you must prove to convict someone of theft: someone takes property that belongs to another, with dishonest intent and with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it. The crucial point is “property belonging to another,” not necessarily “ownership by the person taking it.” You can be charged with theft for taking something you don’t own if it belongs to someone else, and you intend to keep it permanently and do so dishonestly.

Dishonesty is essential because, without it, the taking might be justified or merely wrongful taking, and not theft. The requirement to take with the intention to permanently deprive distinguishes theft from temporary borrowing or other less serious offenses. And proving that the property belongs to someone else is needed to show there was someone other than the defendant who had rights to the property.

Ownership of the item, by contrast, isn’t required to prove theft. A person can steal something they do not own, as long as it belongs to another and the other elements are satisfied. That’s why ownership of the item is the best choice for “NOT a point to prove,” since proving ownership isn’t the central element the law requires to establish theft.