Case law

Question 1

R v Mulcahy

[conspiracy 2 or more]

Answer 1

A conspiracy consists of not merely the intention of two or more but the agreement of two or more people to commit an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means. So long as it remains an intention it is not indictable. When the act is carried out the very plot is the act itself

Question 2

R v Sanders

[conspiracy ending]

Answer 2

A conspiracy does not end at the making of an agreement, it continues in operation and it’s existence is ended by the completion of it’s performance or abandonment or in any other manner by which agreements are discharged

Question 3

R v White

[conspiracy other parties unknown]

Answer 3

Where you can prove a suspect has conspired with other parties (2 or more people) whose identity are unknown, the suspect can still be convicted even if the other parties identity is never established or remains unknown

Question 4

R v Ring

[inferring intent from the act]

Answer 4

The offenders intent was to steal property by putting his hand into the pocket of the pocket of the victim. Unbeknownst to the offender the pocket was empty. The offender was still convicted of attempt theft as his intent was to steal whatever property was inside the pocket and was demonstrated by his actions

Question 5

R v Harpur

[attempt multiple acts]

Answer 5

The court may have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops the defendant conduct may be considered in its entirety. Considering how much remains to be done is always relevant though not determinative

Question 6

P v Higgins

[cultivate fake cannabis]

Answer 6

Where plants being cultivated as cannabis are in fact not cannabis it is physically not legally impossible to cultivate prohibited plants. Possible to be commit the offence of attempting to cultivate cannabis

Question 7

P v Jay

[buying grass]

Answer 7

Man brought grass clippings thinking it was cannabis

Question 8

R v Donnelly

[legally impossible act]

Answer 8

Where property has been returned to the owner or legal title given to any person, it is not an offence to subsequently receive it even though the receiver may know that the property had previously been stolen or dishonestly obtained

Question 9

R v Pene

Answer 9

A party must intentionally help or encourage. It is insufficient if they were reckless as to whether the principal was assisted or encouraged

Question 10

R v Renata

Answer 10

Where the principal offender can’t be identified it is sufficient to prove that each individual accused must have either been the principal or party in one of the ways by 66(1)

Question 11

Police v Larkins

[Lack of assistance]

Answer 11

While it is unnecessary for the principal to be aware that they are being assisted, there must be proof of actual assistance

Question 12

Police v Ashton

[Driving Ashton Ave]

Answer 12

An example of a secondary party owning a legal duty to a third party or to the general public is a person teaching another how to drive. That person is in NZ, under a legal duty to take reasonable precautions whilst in control of a dangerous thing

Question 13

R v Russell

[Lots of water there]

Answer 13

The accused was morally bound to take active steps to save his children, but by his deliberate abstention, giving encouragement and authority of his presence and approval to his wifes act became a aider/abettor and thus a secondary offender.

Question 14

R v Betts and Ridley

Answer 14

An offence where no violence is contemplated and the principal offender carrying out the common purpose uses violence, the secondary party taking no physical party is not liable for the violence used

Question 15

R v Crooks

[Crooks knows no knowledge]

Answer 15

Knowledge means actual knowledge or belief in the sense of having no real doubt that the person assisted was party to an offence. Mere suspicion to their involvement is not enough

Question 16

R v Briggs

[stolen lawnmower Briggs and Stratton]

Answer 16

Knowledge may be inferred by wilful blindness or a deliberate abstention from making inquires that would confirm the suspected truth

Question 17

R v Mane

[Maine]

Answer 17

To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person must be after the completion of the offence

Question 18

R v Gibbs

[Gisborne needs supplies]

Answer 18

Acts done by the accessory must in some way helped the other person to evade justice

Question 19

R v Levy

[ACC levy to do with currency]

Answer 19

Levy had done a deliberate act in relation to the evidence against the offender for the purpose of assisting that offender to evade justice

Question 20

R v Cox

Answer 20

Possession involves two elements. The first is the physical element of actual or potential physical custody or control.

The second, is the mental element is a combination of knowledge and intention. The knowledge in the sense of awareness that the substance is in his possession and intention to exercise possession.

Question 21

R v Cullen

Answer 21

Four elements of possession for receiving

1) Awareness that the item is where it is
2) Awareness that the item has been stolen
3) Actual or potential control of the item
4) An intention to exercise control over the item

Question 22

R v Donnelly

Answer 22

Where stolen property is returned to it’s owner or given legal title to any such person it is not an offence to subsequently receive it, even though the receiver may know it was previously stolen or dishonestly obtained

Question 23

R v Lucinsky

Answer 23

The property received must be the property stolen or illegally obtained (or part of), not some other item for which the illegally obtained property had been exchanged or which are the proceeds

Question 24

R v Kennedy

Answer 24

The guilty knowledge that the thing has been stolen or dishonesty obtained must exist at the time of receiving

Question 25

R v Camerson

Answer 25

Recklessness is established if:
a) The defendant recognised that there is a real possibility that:
i) his/her actions may bring about the proscribed results
ii) proscribed circumstances exists

b) having regard to that those, the actions taken in unreasonable