ATTEMPTS Flashcards
What are the main points in s72(1) CA61?
(1) Having INTENT to commit offence
(2) DOES or OMITS an act
(3) PURPOSE to accomplish aim
(4) Whether POSSIBLE or not
What are the main points in s72(2) CA61?
Whether an act is mere preparation and too remote from the offence, may be a question of law.
What are the main points in s72(3) CA61?
(3) If the act is IMMEDIATELY or PROXIMATELY connected to the offence, then there is no need for another act to prove the INTENT.
Is s72 a liability or a definition for the offence of ATTEMPT?
Definition
What are the elements of ATTEMPT:
Every one who
Having an intent to commit an offence
Does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object
Whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not.
Beyond the three elements of Attempt, there is a FOURTH. What is it?
It must be LEGALLY possible to commit the offence.
(Not to be confused with s72(1) that deals with whether it is actually possible).
Why is there no such thing as Attempted Manslaughter?
Because you can’t INTEND to do something UNINTENTIONALLY.
Can intent be inferred from the circumstances?
Besides Collister, What other case law speaks about this?
Yes, it can be inferred.
Ring - Intent to steal was in his mind and demonstrated by his actions.
R v Ring:
In this case the offender’s intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the victim.
Unbeknownst 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 satisfied.
s72(3) CA61 focuses on SUFFICIENTLY PROXIMATE. This can also be called the, “__ ___ rule”.
The accused must have gone beyond mere preparation, this is called the, “ALL BUT RULE”.
What are some of the acts that may amount to an attempt? List 4:
RUSCEL
(1) RECONNITORING the scene
(2) UNLAWFULLY entering a structure
(3) SOLICITING innocent agent
(4) COLLECTING materials
(5) ENTICING victim to go
(6) LYING in wait
What case law deals with acts sufficiently proximate to constitute an attempt?
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 viewed in its entirety.
Considering how much remains to be done is always relevant though not determinative.
When defining PROXIMITY, what question must be asked?
Have the acts gone beyond the threshold of MERE PREPARATION?
What 2 questions do Simester and Brookbanks suggest should be asked when determining whether an ATTEMPT has been made:
Do both questions need to be answered in the positive or is just one sufficient to conclude there was an attempt?
(1) Has the offender done anything more than get himself into a POSITION from which he could EMBARK on an ATTEMPT?
OR
(2) Has the offender TAKEN STEPS or COMMENCED execution of the crime?
Answerimg yes to either question will suffice as an attempt.
What three case law examples deal with criminal acts where the crime failed due to FACTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY?
Ring:
A thief putting his hand into an empty pocket.
Higgins:
Cultivating plants believing them to be cannabis when actually they are something else.
Jay:
A man bought hedge clippings believing they were cannabis.
What case law can be used as an example of committing an act that is LEGALLY IMPOSSIBLE?
Donnelly:
When stolen property has been returned to the owner, it is not an offence to subsequently receive it.
