Conspiracy Flashcards
R v Gemmell
Gemmell was convicted along with two others for the conspiracy of an aggravated robbery of a post office. Gemmell reluctantly agreed to drive two other defendants to the robbery location but did not agree to their being a shotgun used as it was against his cultural beliefs of non violence.
Can other conspirers be liable for the furtherance of the agreement by one party? Held no.
Held that when it comes to conspiracy robbery and aggravated robbery are two separate crimes - thus because G had not agreed to the gun had not agreed to the offence of aggravated robbery that was committed.
Set out basic AR/MR requirements of conspiracy: the AR is agreement to carry out criminal act whereas MR is an intention to carry criminal act into effect. Held MR must be anterior in time to AR.
You must have both an intention (MR) and agreement (AR).
R v Harris
People can join or leave a conspiracy at various stages at its overall existence - you do not need to have everyone at the start and everyone at the end. This extents to people who may be innocent to begin with, if they then discover what’s being conspired and stay actively involved.
Conspiracy is an ongoing crime - it continues as long as the conspiracy continue up until the commission of the object crime.
R v Richards
Held that AR has to be anterior in time to the object crime contemplated in the agreement. This means that a conspiracy cannot be something spontaneous or heat of the moment thing.
R v Lang
One off drug deal was agreed by telephone and 30 minutes later they met and exchanged money.
Overruled R v Richards and held that it is not conspiracy to provide drugs to yourself.
If we held this to be conspiracy then every time someone was supplied drugs they could be convicted of conspiracy - “to any other person” implies cannot just be a two person drug deal. Overruled HC in R v Richards.
R v Johnson
Johnson is in UK and arranges to have some drugs posted to someone in NZ. It is stopped in customs. Johnson argues that it takes two to conspire and only one was in NZ.
Held that this was conspiracy. Conspiracy is a continuing act not a point in time offence therefore because part of the crime was committed in NZ when taken as a whole there is still a conspiracy.
R v Sew Hoy
Importing clothing as women’s clothing when it was actually men’s clothing because men’s clothing was charged at a higher duty rate. Charged with conspiring to defraud NZ customs rather than the full offence because they did not succeed in defrauding customs.
Held that there is no a defence of impossibly for conspiracy unless it is legally impossible.
It was factually impossible to defraud customs due to their inspection procedures, but the defence of impossibility is only available when it is legally impossible to commit the offence. Company was convicted.
