Association Flashcards
Define Abets, Aids, Incites and Counsels?
Abets - to instigate or encourage, urge another person to commit an offence
Aids - assist in commission of the offence either physically or offering advice etc
Incites - to rouse, stir up, stimulate or animate or spur or urge on a person to commit an offence
Counsels - intentionally instigate the offence by advising or planning for another person
What to prove for a charge of AATF?
- that the person who is received, comforted or assisted by the accessory was party (principal or secondary) to an offence that has been committed
- that at the time of the receiving, comforting or assisting that person, the accessory knows that person was a party to the offence
- that the accessory received, comforted or assisted that person or tampered with or actively suppressed evidence against that person
- that at the time of receiving, comforting or assisting etc, the accessory’s purpose was to enable that person to escape after arrest or avoid conviction
Held in R v Renata?
3 offenders beat victim to death in car park tavern,
The prosecution was unable to establish which blow was the fatal one or which of the 3 administered it.
Court held that where the principal offender cannot be identified sufficient to prove that each individual accused must have been principal or party in one of the ways contemplated by s66(1)
What is held in Section 66(2), C.A 1961?
Where 2 or more persons form common intention to prosecute any unlawful purpose and
to assist each other therein,
each of them is a party to every offence committed by any one of them in the prosecution of the common purpose if the commission of that offence was known to be a probable consequence of the prosecution of the common purpose.
Definition of tainted property?
Means any property that has wholly or in part been:
• acquired as a result of significant criminal activity, or
• directly or indirectly derived from significant criminal activity, and
• includes any property acquired as a result or directly or indirectly derived from more than 1 activity if at least 1 of those activities is a significant criminal activity
What is the meaning of unlawful benefit?
A person unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity if the person has knowingly, directly or indirectly derived a benefit from significant criminal activity (whether or not that person undertook or was involved in the significant criminal activity)
What is Doctrine of recent possession?
Applies to theft and receiving and is the presumption that the possession of recently stolen property is, in the absence of a satisfactory explanation, evidence to justify a believe that the possessor is either the thief or has committed some other offence associated with the theft of property.
Allows for proof by way of circumstantial evidence
What intent required to the charge of perjury?
Intent to be proved so as to prove a charge of perjury is the offender’s intention to mislead the tribunal holding the judicial proceeding
What is held in 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 receivers may know that the property had previously been stolen or dishonestly obtained.
In what circumstances is it permitted for a witness to give opinion evidence
(s24, E.A 2006)?
A witness may state an opinion in evidence in a proceeding if that opinion is necessary to enable the witness to communicate or the fact finder to understand what the witness saw, heard or otherwise perceived, e.g. apparent age, identity, speed, physical and emotional state of people, condition of articles (worn, new, used) and whether person under the influence of drink
Matters to be considered when interviewing conspiracy suspects and witnesses?
Witnesses: WWAT
• with whom the agreement was made
• what offence was planned
• any acts carried out to further the common purpose
• the identity of people present at the time of the agreement
Suspects: WIIEE
• whether anything was written, said or done to further the common purpose
• the intent of those involved in the agreement
• the identity of all people concerned if possible
• the existence of an agreement to commit an offence, or
• the existence of an agreement to omit to do something that would amount to an offence
When to lay a conspiracy charge or substantive charge?
Generally conspiracy charges not laid when substantive charge can be proved, undesirable to lay both because:
- evidence admissible only on the conspiracy charge may have prejudicial effect in relation to other charges
- judge may disallow the evidence as too prejudicial
- addition of conspiracy charge may unnecessarily prolong and complicate a trial
- where charge of conspiracy is not founded on evidence or is an abuse of process, it may be quashed
- severance may be ordered so charging documents heard at separate trials
Two essential ingredients for fabricating evidence?
- intent to mislead any tribunal holding a judicial proceeding to which section 108 applies
- fabricates evidence by means other than perjury
Money laundering knowledge and belief?
Must prove the offender had knowledge or belief that the property was the proceeds of any serious offence (5yrs +) or reckless as to whether it was the proceeds of such an offence.
What is held in Larkins v Police?
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 affect is insufficient. Absence of knowledge by the principal that he is being assisted removes a common foundation for a finding of actual
assistance, namely that the principal was able to proceed with his enterprise with the additional confidence gained because his accomplice was on the lookout for unwanted intervention.
