Complicity Flashcards
How does the MR for the accessory differ from that of the principle?
- Need not be shown to have MR for substantive offence.
- Only that he intended to ASSIST the principle in HIS commission of the crime
What are the two types of complicity?
- Joint Enterprsie
- One as Principle, one as accessory
In cases of strict liability, what will happen if not able to identify the principle?
Pros will need to est that all co-defendents have MR
In what case did two drink-drivers get cleared as courts unable to prove who was driving?
SMITH v MELLORS and SOAR
- evidence overwhelming - both seen running from a car which had been driven by one of them
- Pros not able to prove who driver was
- Without knowing who driver was, unable to pax knew that driver unfit to drive.
- As could not prove that passenger not aware driver drunk, could not convict either.
In what case did 2 parents fatally kill their child?
LANE & LANE
- Fatally injured between 12 and 8:30
- Evidence showed at least one always with child
- Charged with manslaughter
- where evidence does not point to one rather than the other, and there is no evidence that they were acting in concert, the jury ought to acquit both
- Nothing to suggest any assistance from one to the other
What act means that some encouraging D to commit the offence is commissioning that act?
Acc and abettors act 1861
In what case did D hire a hitman to kill his wife?
GIANNETTO 1996
- Conv of murder, appealed on grounds of insufficient evidence whether D or hitman had killed V
- CofA - essential element was whether D had killed his wife or ENCOURAGED another to do it
- enough for conviction
What two options are available if principle aquitted or convicted of a lessor offence?
- Innocent agency - Make P liable rather than the innocent agent.
- Allow for secondary party liability - thought P lacks fault, this can be provided by secondary party.
In what case did a husband allow a friend to have sex with his wife?
COGAN & LEAK 1976
- After drinking, L encouraged C to have sex with L’s wife.
- C believed W was consenting, in fact coerced by L
- C conv then acquitted of rape on appeal.
- L’s liability based on use of C. However rape can not be commited by proxy (requires penetration). Could open rape up to women as principles.
What could be an alternative way of prosecuting Leak in COGAN and LEAK?
- Hold Leak as accessory to rape even though C was acquitted.
- L’s liability lies in his decision to procure the commission of the offence.
What are the two means of contributing for derivative liability as an accessory?
- Encouragement - any forms by words or conduct directly or via an intermediary
- Assistance - may not even need communications.
In what case was the act of chasing a man deemed suffiecient contribution?
STRINGER 2011
- Together with P chased a man.
- D unable to keep up and stopped
- P stabbed and murdered V
- D convicted of murder in assisting and encouraging P
When is a causal requirement needed in accessoryship?
Considered to only be ness when procuring the commission of an offence. (procuring usually meaning cause)
What are the 3 circumstances where a person may incur accessorial liability in the absence of any action?
- Presence at the scene of a crime
- Failure to execute a duty
- Failure to exercise control
What is sufficient to lead to accessorial liability for being at the scene of a crime?
- Common law: Mere presence is not enough
2. Must do something beyond just standing there to assist or encourage.
