Case Law Flashcards
Mulcahy v R
A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. So long as such a design rests in intention only it is not indictable. When two agree to carry it (the intended offence) into effect, the very plot is an act in itself
R v Sanders
A conspiracy does not end with the making of the agreement. The conspirational agreement continues in operation and therefore in existence until it is ended by completion of its performance or abandonment or any other manner by which agreements are discharged
R v White
Where you can prove that a suspect conspired with other parties (one or more people) whose identities are unknown, that suspect can still be convicted even if the identity of the other parties is never established and remains unknown
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 defendants conduct may be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done is always relevant, though not determinative
R v Pene
A party must intentionally help or encourage - it is insufficient if they were reckless as to whether the principal was assisted or encouraged
R v Renata
The court held that where the principal offender cannot be identified, it is sufficient to prove that each individual accused must have been either the principal or a party in one of the ways contemplated by s66(1)
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
Ashton v Police
An example of a secondary party owing a legal duty to a third person or to the general public is a person teaching another person to drive, That person is, in NZ, under a legal duty to take legal precautions, because under s156 of the Crimes Act 1961 he is deemed to be in charge of a dangerous thing
R v Russell
The court held that the accused was morally bound to take active steps to save his children, but by his deliberate abstention from doing so, and by giving the encouragement and authority of his presence and approval to his wife’s act he became an aider and abettor and thus a secondary offender
R v Betts and Ridley
An offence where no violence is contemplated and the principal offender in carrying out the common aim uses violence, a secondary offender taking no physical part in it would not be held liable for the violence used.
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
R v Mane
To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person must be after the completion of the offence.
R v Cox
Possession involves two elements. The first, the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, the mental element, is a combination of knowledge and intention: knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused that the substances is in his possession and an intention to exercise possession.
