What does going equipped for criminal damage mean?

• A. Carrying any item that could physically damage property
• B. Possessing anything in your possession or control that could be intended to cause criminal damage
• C. Only possessing items used to commit arson
• D. Nothing unless you have actually damaged something

Answer: (B)

The idea being tested is that going equipped for criminal damage turns on both what you have in your possession and your intent to use it for wrongdoing. The offence is not about actually damaging something yet; it’s about being prepared to commit the damage. If you possess something in your control that could be used to cause criminal damage, and you intend to use it for that purpose, that meets the test.

That’s why the correct understanding is that possessing anything that could be intended to cause criminal damage, with the intention to use it for that purpose, is enough. It isn’t limited to items that would only be used for arson, and it doesn’t require that any damage actually occurs. The other options misstate the test in different ways: one broadens to any item that could physically damage property without regard to intent; another narrows to arson only; and the last suggests no offence exists unless damage has already happened, which is not how this offence works.