Criminal 7 - Attempts and Parties

Question 1

Attempts

Answer 1

Inchoate (incomplete)

If with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence, he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence.

Excludes summary only.

Question 2

Actus reus

Answer 2

Not liable for omission

More than merely preparatory
question of fact for jury.
-begins when merely preparatory acts have come to an end and the defendant embarks on the crime proper.

-Judge assesses whether prosecution evidence is such that a jury could reasonably conclude the act were not simply preparatory.
-if no then still at early, judge must withdraw case from jury
-if yes decide as a question of fact.

Question 3

Mens rea

Answer 3

Can include direct and indirect
R v Woollen - foresight as a virtual certainty of evidence from which jury may find intention

Ulterior mens rea
Example - aggravated criminal damage.
Intend or be reckless at to destroying or damaging property also intend or be reckless as to endangering life.

Ulterior - only needs to establish intention or recklessness as to.

Question 4

Attempts and impossibility

Answer 4

Guilty even if what were intending to commit was impossible.

Mens rea -
judged on facts of case as they believed them to be.
Judged on intended rather than what was possible.

Question 5

Parties to a crime

Answer 5

-

Question 6

Terminology

Answer 6

Principal - commits actus of a substantive criminal offence with necessary mens.

Joint principals (co-principals) - two or more perform acts and mens of offence together

Secondary party (accomplice or accessory) - assist in commission of an offence whilst not committing acts reps themselves

Question 7

Accomplice liability

Answer 7

Aid, abet, counsel or procure commission of an offence.

Attract same powers as owed to principal offender.

Either way and indictable only.

Question 8

Actus reus

Answer 8

Not one term singled out

aiding;
helping or assisting. At time of offence or earlier. Not disposal of evidence.
Weapon or information
Acting as lookout

abetting;
encourage
during commission
words or actions

Counselling;
instigating, soliciting or encouraging or even threats
some stage before
winding up
Encouragement does not need to be great

Procuring;
sets out to achieve particular state of affairs and take appropriate steps to bring about
Earlier time
Commit offence they otherwise would not have done.

Mere presence not enough. Will depend on fact.
Will be guilty if;
attendance by prior arrangement with principal
encouraged or assisted

Question 9

Link.

Answer 9

Mental link -
meeting of minds, do not need to meet beforehand.
No need to prove contract.
Only need for abetting and aiding

Counselling or procurement - generally does need to be meeting of minds.

Causal link;
Between accomplice behaviour and commission of offence. (procurement)
Aiding, abetting or counselling do not need

Irrelevant if principal would have or not

After offence not liable, only for other offences.

Question 10

Principal not convicted but accomplice is

Answer 10

Principal has a defence -
Law now changed to reasonable in rape. But R v Cogan and Leak (1976)

Principal cannot be found-

Question 11

Innocent agency

Answer 11

Commits actus rea but not guilty as lack mens rea.

Question 12

Mens rea

Answer 12

Relation to act or words that establish acts reus.
Consideration of accomplice’s knowledge or awareness of the circumstances.

Joint venture -
commit with common purpose or plan.
Can be on scene and not committed

First
Intentionally;
did the act that assisted, encouraged or procured
spoke the words that advised, encouraged or procured the crime.

Second
Knowledge of the circumstances;
‘essential matters that constitute the offence’
If not full knowledge
‘Need only know that a crime of the type in question was intended’

Question 13

Liability for different offence to principal

Answer 13

Actus reus must be committed (REMINDER)

Judged on own level of mens rea.

May be more or less serious.

Question 14

Liability where principal goes beyond plan

Answer 14

What was going on in mind
Whether they intended new offence.

Just because they see might does not mean intention..

Example
Carry a knife, knew person had propensity for violence (probably liable).

Must intend to assist or encourage PO in new offence.

Jury takes assessment of level of knowledge and what going through mind.

Question 15

Withdrawing participation

Answer 15

Question of fact for jury

Withdrawal before offence;
Before offence, must be timely and unequivocal

Withdrawal during the offence;
Must do more than simple communication.
Physical intervention perhaps at later stage.