Complicity: Aiding and Abetting

Question 1

Wilcox v Jeffery

Answer 1

Facts: Hawkins was an American saxophonist who unlawfully performed in London. Willcox is a reporter for a magazine and attended the concert and reported on it
Analysis: If the presence was accidental it is not evidence of aiding and abetting; when presence is not accidental it is evidence, but no more than evidence, for the jury.

Question 2

R v Kulbacki

Answer 2

Facts: Man was in car while girl drove his car recklessly
Holding: Failure to protest is the equivalent to encouragement in this case

Question 3

R v Thatcher

Answer 3

Facts: Ex-wife murdered in her garage, jury found accused either did it or hired someone to do it

Holding: Accused should still be found guilty of jury finds he did it in one of two ways but don’t agree on which of the 2 ways

Analysis:
• The Crown is not under a duty to separate the different forms of participation in a criminal offence into two counts

Question 4

R v O’Brien

Answer 4

Facts: Mr. O’Brien offered words of encouragement to commit the robbery. Ms. Roberts didn’t want to commit the robbery, was undecided at the time of encouragement
Holding: O’Brien aided and abetting because without his encouragement she would not have committed the robbery

Question 5

R v Hibbert

Answer 5

Facts: Man led shooter to best friends house, did not want his best friend to be shot, argued that duress negated his mens rea, not his conscious object to kill his friend
Holding: Mens rea for aiding and abetting cannot be negated by duress.
o Painting MR so narrowly would exclude conduct we wish to criminalize
o Purpose in s21(1)(b) is essentially synonymous with intention
 Intention does not equal desire
o Still can use statutory defence (section 17) or common law defence of duress
o Mens rea for party liability is MPC knowledge (Lamer in Hibbert, paras 31 et seq)

Question 6

R v Dunlop & Sylvester

Answer 6

Facts: Complainant was gang-raped, she said by complainant. Complainant said he dropped off beer and saw people having sex but didn’t have sex with her himself

Holding: No evidence that the accused had prior knowledge of the rape when they showed up. They were bystanders. Mere presence does not make you an accomplice to a crime

Question 7

R v Briscoe

Answer 7

Facts: Briscoe drove the car that a 13-year-old girl was lured into, watched her get raped and murdered. Trial judge found nothing to indicate he knew about the plans for this crime.

Holding: the court should have asked if the accused was willfully blind

Analysis:

• For knowledge, the aider must know that the perpetrator intends to commit the crime, need not know precisely how
o Perpetrators intention to kill the victim must be known to the aider or abetter, but the intention need not be shared