Evolution of the Offence Flashcards
What is mens rea and what two concepts does it generally consist of?
The Guilty mind. Intention or recklessness.
What is intent?
An intention to commit a deliberate act or omission and the intention to get a specific result.
What are the two case laws covering recklessness?
Cameron v R and R v Tipple.
What is the case law covering intent?
R v Collister
Explain R v Collister
Circumstantial evidence may infer the offender’s intent.
The offenders’ actions or words, before, during or after the event.
The surrounding circumstances.
The nature of the act itself.
Explain Cameron v R
Recklessness is established if the defendant recognized there was a real possibility
His/her action would bring about the proscribed result, and
The proscribed circumstances existed, and
Their actions were unreasonable in regard to the risk.
Explain R v Tipple
The defendant must know or have a conscious appreciation of the risk and make a deliberate decision to run that risk.
What does proscribed mean?
Forbidden.
What is the difference between subjective recklessness and objective recklessness?
Subjective is in regard to what the defendant thinks at the time of the act. Objective is what a reasonable person would think in the circumstances.
What is wilful blindness?
Turning a blind eye to the circumstances.
What is actus reus?
The state of affairs, an act or omission.
Explain the chain of causation?
A connection between the acts of the defendant and the final consequence must exist. Must be an unbroken chain of events.
What are the five statutory defences provided for in the Crimes Act 1961?
Infancy
Defence of self or another
Defence of property
Insanity
Compulsion
What are 6 common law defences not written in legislation?
Intoxication
Sane Automatism
Mistake
Consent
Necessity
Impossibility
What is a conspiracy?
An agreement between two or more people to commit an offence.
In regard to conspiracy, what is an agreement?
Agreeing to follow a course of conduct (act/omission) that would amount to an offence if carried out. Agreeing turns mens rea into actus reus.
What are the three different case law in regard to conspiracy?
Mulcahy v R, R v White, R v Sanders.
Summarise Mulcahy v R
A conspiracy…..agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act……when two agree to carry the offence into effect, the very plot is an act in itself
Summarise R v Sanders
A conspiracy does not end with the making of an agreement…. continues in operation until the completion of its performance or abandonment or other…..
Summarise R v White
Where you can prove a suspect conspired with others, but their identities are unknown, the suspect can still be convicted.
If any act or omission occurs in NZ, does it matter if the person charged was in NZ at the time?
No
What are the three conditions that must apply for an attempt conviction to succeed?
Mens Rea - Intent
Actus Reus - Act
Proximity - That their act or omission was sufficiently close
Name the case law relating to Attempts
R v Harpur
Explain R v Harpur
…….More on the quality of the defendants acts and time, place and circumstances…..less on abstract tests of preparations and proximity
Explain the test for proximity
Has the offender done anything more than getting himself into a position from which he can embark on an actual attempt.
Has the offender commenced execution of the offence.
What is the function of the judge in regard to attempts in the court phase?
Law - To decide whether the accused had left the preparation phase and trying to effect completion of the offence.
What is the role of the jury in regard to attempts in the court trial phase?
Facts - determine whether the facts prove beyond reasonable doubt
What does section 66 of the Crimes Act 1961 relate to?
Parties to offences
Explain 66(1) of the Crimes Act 1961
Everyone is a party to and guilty of an offence who:
Actually commits the offence, or
does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence, or
abets any person in the commission of an offence, or
incites, counsels or procures any person to commit the offence
What does procure mean?
to get someone to commit the offence
what does abet mean?
encourage
What does incite mean?
encourage to start
What do you need to prove when charging a person with being party to an offence?
The identity of the defendant, and
The offence has been successfully committed, and
the elements of S66(1) have been satisfied
Is each party to all of an offence liable for parts they didn’t do?
Yes
What are the 4 case law regarding parties to an offence?
R v Renata, Larkins v Police, R v Russell, R v Betts and Ridley
Explain R v Renata
Where the principal offender cannot be identified, it is sufficient to prove that each individual accused must have been either the principal or a party in one of the ways contemplated in s66(1).
Explain Larkins V Police
While it is unnecessary that the principle should be aware that he or she is being assisted, there must be proof of actual assistance.
Explain R v Russell
….morally bound to take active steps to save his children, but by deliberate abstention…and giving encouragement and authority of his presence…….he became an aider and abettor - relates to woman drowning kids
Summarise R v Betts and Ridley
if violence not planned and principal offender uses violence with secondary offender not taking part then secondary is not liable for violence.
Summarise probable consequence
co-offender must actually foresee the likelihood of their co-offenders actions and other offences
What is an accessory after the fact?
knowing any person to have been a party to the offence, receives, comforts, or assists that person or tampers or suppresses evidence, in order to enable him or her to escape or avoid, arrest or conviction.
What are the three points to prove regarding accessory after the fact?
Knowing the person committed or was a party to an offence, did something (comfort, receives, assists, tampers or supresses) and intended to do so.
Name the three pieces of case law regarding accessory after the fact
R v Mane, R v Briggs, R v Crooks
Explain R v Mane
To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person must be after the completion of the offence.E
Summarise R v Crooks
Mere suspicion the of the persons involvement is insufficient, must have actual knowledge or believe beyond reasonable doubt
Summarise R v Briggs
In regard to receiving, knowledge may be inferred from wilful blindless or a deliberate abstention from making inquiries
