Attempts & Accomplice Liability

Question 1

AR and MR must coincide in time, but can be one series of acts

Answer 1

THABO-MELI v R

Question 2

If D has malice (intent/recklessness) to commit a crime against one victim, the malice is transferred from MR in relation to the original victime to the other unintended victim

Answer 2

R v LATIMER

Question 3

Under the Doctrine of Transferred Malice, the AR must be the same type of crime as D originally intended

Answer 3

R v Pembliton

Question 4

More than Preparatory - Significant steps need to be taken towards the full offence, but not necessary for D to have done all he intends to do

Answer 4

R v JONES

Question 5

More than Preparatory - He must at least have embarked upon the crime proper (Question of Fact)

Answer 5

GULLEFER

Question 6

More than Preparatory - Impossibility doesn’t prevent an act (AR) being more than merely preparatory - Also, had sufficient MR

Answer 6

R v SHIVPURI

Question 7

For criminal damage - MR (intention) must be there - Reckless is not enough

Answer 7

R v WHYBROW

Question 8

If recklessness to existing circumstances suffices for full offence, it will suffice for an attempt

Answer 8

R v KHAN

Question 9

You won’t be prosecuted as an accomplice to a law intended to protect you

Answer 9

R v TYRELL

Question 10

The criminal law will take precedence over civil law where, say, performing a contract amounts to knowingly assisting a criminal offence

Answer 10

GARRETT v ARTHUR CHURCHILL

Question 11

AR of Accomplice - Words given their ordinary meaning - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure

Answer 11

A-G’S REFERENCE NO.1 1975

Question 12

AR of Accomplice - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure - Mere presence at the scene is not sufficient for an accomplice – you need prior arrangement or some sort of encouragement

Answer 12

R v CLARKSON

Question 13

AR of Accomplice - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure - Paying to attend an illegal event could amount to encouragement of a crime

Answer 13

WILCOX v JEFFERY

Question 14

AR of Accomplice - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure - Silence where you have a duty or obligation to restrain another might amount to encouragement

Answer 14

DU CROS v LAMBOURNE

Question 15

AR of Accomplice - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure - Pub owner who let customers drink after hours held to be an accomplice to drinking after hours because of duty to stop customers

Answer 15

TUCK v ROBINSON

Question 16

AR of Accomplice - Aid, Abet, Counsel, Procure - Failure of one parent to intervene in ill-treatment by other parent of a child held to amount to encouragement

Answer 16

R v RUSSELL & RUSSELL

Question 17

AR of Accomplice - A Crime - The AR of the actual crime needs to be committed by the principal to have an accomplice

Answer 17

R v DIAS

Question 18

AR of Accomplice - A Crime - You can be liable as an accomplice even if the principal is acquitted as long as the AR is committed

Answer 18

R v COGAN & LEAK

Question 19

AR of Accomplice - A Crime - Use of innocent Agents to commit the AR of a crime usually results in the D being convicted as the Principal rather than an Accomplice

Answer 19

R v BOURNE

Question 20

MR of Accomplice - 2 Parts

Answer 20

NATIONAL COAL BOARD v GAMBLE

(1) Intention to do the act that aided the Principal
(2) Knowledge of the Circumstances

Question 21

MR of Accomplice - Knowledge of the circumstances
– Knew suspected things amounting to AR would happen
– Don’t need to know it’s a crime, ignorance of law no defence
– D had in his contemplation all the circumstances of the principal offence

Answer 21

JOHNSON v YOUDEN

Question 22

MR of Accomplice - Knowledge of the type of act is sufficient - Don’t need specific details

Answer 22

R v BAINBRIDGE

Question 23

MR of Accomplice - If D has a range of offences in contemplation, he is liable for any of them actually committed

Answer 23

MAXWELL v DPP OF N.IRELAND

Question 24

Strict liability: MR still needed for Accomplice to SL offences as well as Principal

Answer 24

CALLOW v TILLSTONE

Question 25

It is possible for an accomplice to face a more serious charged provided the AR is committed

Answer 25

R v HOWE

Question 26

Withdrawal - Unequivocal, effective and timely communication of withdrawal

Answer 26

R v BECERRA

Question 27

Withdrawal - Words may be effective where A withdraws before crime

Answer 27

R v GRUNDY

Question 28

All “co-adventurers”, principal and accomplice, are liable for the unintended consequence of carrying out a plan

Answer 28

R v LOVESEY & PETERSON

Question 29

Where the principal has deliberately exceeded the plan, the accomplice will not have liability for the unauthorised act

Answer 29

R v ANDERSON & MORRIS

Question 30

Where the principal carries out the deed contemplated by A and P, A should be guilty according to level of intent he acted with, including unintended consequences

Answer 30

R v GILMOUR

Question 31

Where P departs from plan, A will not have liability for murder unless A foresaw that P might intentionally do killing or GBH

Answer 31

R v POWELL

Question 32

If A foresees that P might intentionally cause GBH but (but not kill) and P causes it in a fundamentally different way to that foreseen by A (ie knife instead of stick) A will not be liable for manslaughter or murder

Answer 32

R v ENGLISH

Question 33

Different knife is not a fundamental difference

Answer 33

R v YEMOH