Dunmow thief who caused £3,000 damage in three raids of same Co-op spared jail

Dunmow Co-op. Picture: SaffronPhoto

Dunmow Co-op. Picture: SaffronPhoto - Credit: Archant

A Dunmow burglar who targeted the same Co-operative store three times has been spared jail.

Daniel Rudkin, 18, of The Causeway, raided the Dunmow Co-op on November 15 last year, stealing alcohol and confectionary worth £154.98.

On January 30, he returned to the shop and took two bottles of vodka. Later in the day, Rudkin went back and stole tobacco and alcohol worth £500.

Police were called and Rudkin was arrested at the scene and there was a struggle, during which he spat at an officer.

During his burglaries, Rudkin is said to have damaged the tobacco shutter and two windows, as well as other damage to the store, worth more than £3,200 in total.

Prosecutor Lesley Chipps said: “The property was broken into in November last year and various items of alcohol and confectionary stolen. CCTV revealed it was Rudkin.

“On January 30 this year the shop theft occurred involving about £40 worth of items and on the same date the second burglary was committed. He was detained at the scene. Becoming agitated, he kicked out and spat at a police officer’s face.”

Most Read

Paul Tawn, mitigating, said: “He’s never been in trouble before and then got himself in a lot of bother in a very short time. He had drugs and mental health issues.”

Rudkin said that he couldn’t remember spitting at an officer, but he recalled retaliating in a struggle with police.

Chelmsford magistrates heard on Friday (April 8) that Rudkin had not been taking his medication but was using other drugs and legal highs at the time.

Rudkin, who at an earlier date had admitted burglary and assaulting a police officer, was given a 12-week sentence at a youth offenders institute, which was suspended for 12 weeks.

He was also ordered to complete a six-month drug rehabilitation and a 30-day activity requirement as well as pay £50 to the officer he spat at.

There was no requirement to pay for the damage caused as the court was not given a formal break down of the costs.