Accessory After the Fact Flashcards
What are the ingredients for Accessory After the Fact?
Accessory after the Fact Section 71(1) Crimes Act 1961 Initial offence is life = 7yrs Initial offence is 10yrs or more = 5yrs Any other initial offence = half the penalty
- Knowing
- Any person
- To be a party to an offence
- Comforts OR Assists OR Receives or Tampers with OR Actively suppresses with any evidence against him
- In order to enable that person to escape after arrest OR to avoid arrest or conviction
Explain Section 71(2) in relation to a spouse and whether they can be an AATF.
You cannot be charged with being an accessory after the fact to your spouse (legally married), or your spouse and another party (this when they work in concert).
This same limitation applies to those in a civil union, but does not extend to encompass those in de facto relationships or other family relationships.
What are the penalties for AATF - Section 312, Crimes Act 1961?
- Life = 7yrs
- 10yrs or more imprisonment = 5yrs
- Any other case is liable to not more than half the maximum punishment to which he would have been liable if he had committed the offence.
Case Law:
- R v Crooks
- R v Briggs
- R v Mane
R v CROOKs
Knowledge means actual knowledge or belief in the sense of having no real doubt that the person assisted was a part to the relevant offence.
R v BRIGGS
Knowledge may also be inferred from wilful blindness that the offence was committed
R v MANE
The act done by the accessory MUST be done after the completion of the offence.
Definitions for the following:
Knowing/Knowledge
“Knowing” means “knowing, or correctly believing” … the belief must be a correct one, where the belief is wrong a person cannot know something: Simester & Brookbanks: Principles of Criminal Law.
It also means knowing or believing a set of circumstances so as to be free from doubt.
*********
At the time of the assistance being given, an accessory must possess the knowledge that:
• an offence HAS BEEN committed
and
• the person they are assisting WAS A PARTY to that offence.
Where this knowledge comes about following the rendering of the assistance they are not liable as an accessory.
What are the ingredients for Party - Section 66(1) Crimes Act 1961?
Section 661(1)(a) to (d)
Party Section 66(1) Crimes Act 1961
EVERYONE IS A PARTY TO AND GUILTY OF AN OFFENCE WHO -
(a) Actually commits the offence; or
(b) Does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence; or
(c) Abets any person in the commission of the offence; or
(d) Incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit the offence.
Definition for the following:
- Offence - Section 2, CA 1961
- Proof of Offence committed
- Receives
- Comforts
- Assists
OFFENCE
Any act or omission that is punishable on conviction under any enactment, and are in 4 categories.
PROOF OF OFFENCE COMMITTED
While it is unnecessary that the principal should be aware that he or she is being assisted, THERE MUST BE PROOF OF ACTUAL ASSISTANCE.
The mere commission of an act intended to have that effect is insufficient.
RECEIVES/COMFORTS or ASSISTS
The accused does a deliberate act for the purpose of assisting the person to evade justice. The act done must actually help the person in some way.
Definition/Discussion of tampers with or Actively suppresses Evidence.
Complete of Offence - R v Mane
TAMPERS WITH or ACTIVELY SUPPRESSES ANY EVIDENCE
Must do a deliberate act in relation to evidence against offender for purpose of assisting person evade justice. The act must actually help the person.
COMPLETION OF OFFENCE
In R v Mane, the accused was initially charged with being an accessory after the fact to murder, in that it was alleged that he gave assistance to the parties charged with the murder of another.
R v MANE
To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person MUST BE AFTER the completion of the offence.
Case Law
R v Crooks
R v Briggs
R v CROOKS
Knowledge means actual knowledge or belief in the sense of having no real doubt that the person assisted was a party to the relevant offence. Mere suspicion of their involvement in the offence is insufficient.
**********
R v BRIGGS
As with a receiving charge under s246(1), knowledge may also be inferred from wilful blindness or a deliberate abstention from making inquiries that would confirm the suspected truth.
Case Law
R v Ring
R v Harpur
R v RING
In this case the offender’s intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the victim. Unbeknown to the offender the pocket was empty. Despite this he was able to be convicted of attempted theft, because the intent to steal whatever property might have been discovered inside the pocket was present in his mind and demonstrated by his actions. The remaining elements were also satisfied.
**********
R v HARPUR
[The Court may]”have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops … the defendant’s conduct [may] be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done … is always relevant, though not determinative.”
Case Law
Police v Jay
R v Donnelly
Police v JAY
A man bought hedge clippings believing they were cannabis.
An act is physically or factually impossible if the act in question amounts to an offence, but the suspect is unable to commit it due to interruption, ineptitude, or any other circumstances beyond his or her control.
R v Ring (previously discussed), Higgins v Police and Police v Jay are examples of physical impossibility as it relates to attempts.
**********
R v DONNELLY
Where stolen property has been returned to the owner or legal title to any such property has been acquired by any person, it is not an offence to subsequently receive it, even though the receiver may know that the property had previously been stolen or dishonestly obtained.
