66(2) parties and withdrawl

Question 1

what is s 66(2)

Answer 1

common purpose liability: usually two or more persons and they set out together and their purpose is to commit crime A, along the way, crime B is committed by one person in that group. If we can say it was probable that crime B was going to happen then all of those involved in crime A are also guilty

Question 2

what is needed for s 66(2) to be charged

Answer 2

1. A common intention to prosecute an unlawful purpose
2. An offence committed by any one person
3. An offence committed in the prosecution of the unlawful purpose
4. The commission of the offence was known to be a probable consequence of the prosecution of the common purpose

Question 3

when will 66(2) NOT be charged

Answer 3

the “common purpose” has expired and is no longer being prosecuted, so conduct that comes after is not attached to the common purpose (eg, Hubbard, the arson after the burglary)

the “common purpose” is continuing but the 1o party departs from that purpose so markedly that the offence is not committed “in the prosecution of” that purpose (eg, Te Moni hypothetical of a rape committed in the course of a “routine” robbery). Must be a ‘complete departure’ to step outside of common purpose.

Question 4

3 people live together 2 people did not like the victim and one of them killed him

Answer 4

Curtis

unlike s 66(1), s 66(2) does not require:

knowledge that the 1º party will commit the consequential offence; or
any intention to assist or encourage the commission of the offence; or
any actual help or encouragement in committing the offence

Question 5

man bet with pool cues in bar by 3 men and died - could not tell who killed him

Answer 5

Nathan - Because we could not say who did that blow we cannot charge a principal party so everyone is guilty of manslaughter; if we did know who struck the blow that killed him they could all be guilty of murder

Question 6

bank robbery where the teller was shot which was not in the plan

Answer 6

Te Moni
Once prosecution can prove that secondary parties knew Matenga had a loaded gun the possibility that someone could be shot and killed in a robbery should be in their contemplation.

Question 7

Withdrawl (defence for both 66(1) and (2)

Answer 7

Ashin

1. There must be timely conduct, whether by words or actions, that demonstrates clearly to others

“timely” means that the conduct must occur before the principal offence is committed or attempted. If left too late, there are circumstances in which withdrawal will be extremely difficult or impossible.

2. The withdrawing 2o party must take reasonable and sufficient steps to undermine the effect of their previous participation or to prevent the commission of the principal offence. What is reasonable will largely depend on the facts of the case.

eg: contacting the police, warning potential victims, reclaiming loaned property, notifying those with influence over the principal (E.g a young person telling their parents or a person telling their partner).