Accessorial liability

Question 1

Actus reus elements

Answer 1

Re AG Ref (No. 1)
Aiding = assisting; abetting = encouraging; counselling = encouraging; procuring = helped without assistance.

Stated in Bryce that there were shades of difference between the phrases but that all required ‘some form of causal connection’ between the assistance and the offence. CoA recommended that accessories should be charged using a ‘catch-all’ composite phrase.

Question 2

Mens rea elements, case:

Answer 2

R v Jogee and Ruddock
AL requires that the defendant intends to assist or encourage the principal offence with the required mens rea.
1. mens rea as to their assistance;
2. mens rea as to the principal offence.

Question 3

Mens rea, as to conduct, case:

Answer 3

National Coal Board v Gamble
Facts: defendant supplied coal to principal, knowing that the lorry was over-laden. Principal committed offence of it being too heavy, defendant charged as an accessory. Found guilty.
Principle: conviction upheld on appeal. Defendant obliquely intended to assist.

Question 4

Mens, as to the principal offence, case:

Answer 4

Expected: Johnson v Youden, must know the essential matters that constitute the principal offence.

Entirely different: R v English, not liable if fundamentally different to what they assisted.

Withdrawal: R v Rook, planned to kill his wife but did not meet the others as planned. Would not suffice to absolve D of liability, not effectively communicated.