Accomplices

Question 1

MR NCB v Gamble

Answer 1

There are two elements to the MR

a) Intention to aid
b) Knowledge of the circumstances

Question 2

Bainbridge

Answer 2

Detail need not be known but an awareness that the principal was going to commit some form of illegal act is sufficient to establish MR

Question 3

Maxwell

Answer 3

Led members of UVF to pub where principals threw in pipe bomb

• Argued he did not know what they were going to do
• It is enough that the offence committed by the principle is within the range of possible offences which the accomplice intentionally assisted or encouraged him to commit

Question 4

Jogee/ Ruddock

Answer 4

In the past they tended to say that if accomplice had foresight they automatically had intent
Realised that actual proof of intent needed
Jogee confirms:
- ‘Foresight is proof of intent only. It is not synonymous with intent.’

Question 5

Gilmour

Answer 5

You are liable to the extent of your own MR
e.g. Gary has a gun and Patrick has no idea and did not give any thought to the possibility that he would, he is not an accomplice to murder