Essay: Section fifteen of the Theft Act 1968
In the case of the presence of the section fifteen of the Theft Act 1968, it would be viewed whether Alex’s crime was punishable or not as per the above section. According, to the three sub-sections of Section fifteen of the Theft Act 1968, what came across was that in the circumstances in which the person who through deception obtains the property of someone else, or obtains the property from someone else.
In this case, the word deception was used in the context of have deceptive intentions or using the deception of another person.
In the case of Alex, the above proved to be true on all counts as not only does Alex lie about the fact that he was not responsible for the accident but he also stated that he would report Bella for having committed a similar crime for the past ten years. And threatens to break off ties completely, unless what he wanted was not carried out.
On all grounds, Alex is clearly deceiving Bella who was under the wrong assumption that it was the fault of the militant vegetarian. Hence, under the influence of threat and extortion, Bella agrees. Therefore, Alex is clearly a criminal as per section number fifteen of the Theft Act 1968, as he has deceived Bella on every level.