Burglary Cases In Finland
1. Legal Framework for Burglary in Finland
A. Definition
Under Finnish law, burglary (murto) involves unlawful entry into a building or property with intent to commit theft, robbery, or other crimes. It can include:
Residential burglary (homes, apartments)
Commercial burglary (shops, offices)
Vehicle or storage facility break-ins
B. Relevant Laws
Criminal Code of Finland (Rikoslaki 39/1889, as amended)
Chapter 28: Property Crimes
Section 28: Theft (Varas)
Section 29: Aggravated theft (Törkeä varkaus)
Section 34: Burglary (Murto)
Section 36: Aggravated burglary (Törkeä murto)
Aggravating factors include:
Use of weapons
Breaking into dwellings
High-value property
Multiple offenders
Penalties
Simple burglary: up to 2 years imprisonment or fines
Aggravated burglary: 4–6 years imprisonment
2. Notable Burglary Cases in Finland
Case 1: Helsinki Jewelry Store Burglary (2005)
Facts:
Armed group broke into a luxury jewelry store in central Helsinki.
Items stolen valued at over €1 million.
Law Applied:
Criminal Code Sections 28, 34, and 36 (aggravated burglary due to armed entry).
Judgment:
All suspects arrested within a week.
Sentences: 5 years imprisonment for primary offenders, fines for accomplices.
Significance:
High-value commercial burglary considered aggravated due to weapons and premeditation.
Case 2: Residential Burglary in Espoo (2008)
Facts:
Intruder entered a family home at night, stealing electronics and jewelry.
Law Applied:
Section 34 (burglary into dwelling) and Section 28 (theft).
Judgment:
Perpetrator caught via CCTV and forensic evidence.
Sentence: 2 years imprisonment.
Significance:
Residential burglaries carry heavier penalties than non-dwelling theft.
Case 3: Rovaniemi Storage Facility Burglary (2011)
Facts:
Multiple offenders broke into a storage facility, stealing motorcycles and machinery.
Law Applied:
Section 34 (burglary) and Section 29 (aggravated theft due to high-value items).
Judgment:
Convicted after investigation by local police.
Sentence: 3 years imprisonment, restitution ordered to victims.
Significance:
Demonstrates organized burglary rings targeting high-value property.
Case 4: Tampere ATM Burglary (2014)
Facts:
Criminals broke into an ATM using explosives and stole cash.
Law Applied:
Sections 34 and 36 (aggravated burglary due to use of explosives and threat to public safety).
Judgment:
Arrests made based on forensic evidence and surveillance footage.
Sentence: 6 years imprisonment for ringleaders.
Significance:
Highlights aggravated burglary factors, including weapons/explosives and threat to life.
Case 5: University of Helsinki Laboratory Burglary (2017)
Facts:
Intruder stole scientific equipment and sensitive research materials.
Law Applied:
Section 34 (burglary) and Section 36 (aggravated burglary due to high-value items).
Judgment:
Perpetrator apprehended via fingerprints.
Sentence: 3 years imprisonment; property recovered.
Significance:
Shows that institutional burglaries are treated seriously, especially for research or high-value assets.
Case 6: Helsinki Art Gallery Burglary (2019)
Facts:
Thieves stole rare paintings and sculptures.
Estimated value: over €2 million.
Law Applied:
Sections 34, 36 (aggravated burglary due to high value and cultural significance).
Judgment:
Police recovered half the items through Interpol collaboration.
Sentences: 5–6 years imprisonment, confiscation of recovered artwork.
Significance:
Highlights cultural property theft during burglaries and international recovery cooperation.
Case 7: Vehicle Burglary in Oulu (2021)
Facts:
Thieves broke into parked vans and cars, stealing tools and electronics.
Law Applied:
Section 34 (burglary) and Section 28 (theft).
Judgment:
Minor offenders arrested; sentences ranged from fines to 1 year imprisonment.
Significance:
Vehicle-related burglaries carry lighter sentences than dwellings or commercial properties.
3. Key Observations
Types of Burglaries in Finland:
Residential
Commercial
Institutional or research facilities
Vehicle or storage facilities
Aggravating Factors:
Breaking into dwellings
Use of weapons or explosives
High-value or culturally significant property
Multiple offenders/conspiracy
Investigation Techniques:
CCTV surveillance
Forensic evidence (fingerprints, DNA)
Cross-border cooperation for stolen art or high-value items
Penalties:
Simple burglary: up to 2 years imprisonment or fines
Aggravated burglary: 4–6 years imprisonment
Restitution and confiscation of stolen property
4. Conclusion
Burglary cases in Finland demonstrate:
Serious criminal liability for both residential and commercial property theft.
Heavier penalties for aggravated burglary involving weapons, high-value items, or multiple offenders.
The legal system emphasizes forensic investigation and international cooperation in high-value or cross-border burglaries.
RELATED Blog
comments