The decision in Gomez (R v Gomez [1993] 1 All ER 1 (HL)), that appropriation is a neutral act, makes it possible for there to be theft of a gift. R v Hinks [2000] 4 All ER 833 FACTS: The defendant became friendly with a 53-year-old man of limited intelligence. Every day she took him to his building society and he withdrew the maximum daily amount of £300. She influenced, persuaded, or coerced him into giving her this money. Ultimately, he gave her £60,000. She was charged with theft. The trial judge directed the jury to consider the donor's state of mind when he gave the defendant the money and whether the defendant was dishonest. The defendant was convicted. She appealed against her conviction on the grounds that the trial judge had failed to clearly direct the jury that she could not be guilty of theft if the donor had made a valid gift to her. HELD: The House of Lords dismissed the appeal and held: (a) appropriation is a neutral act and the state of mind of the donor is irrelevant to appropriation; (b) therefore appropriation could take place with or without the consent of the owner; and (c) therefore a person could be guilty of stealing a valid inter vivos gift.