Joint Enterprise Liability Flashcards
ACCESSORIES AND ABETTORS ACT 1861 S.8
s.b. page 4
Statutory basis for joint enterprise liability
R. v ABCD [2010]
Recognised + defined 3 forms of JEL
1) 2 people are joint principals.
2) Principal carries out alone - D is an accessory - assists/encourages - need not be present at scene. D is liable as a secondary party, if it can be proved that:
- D gave assistance/encouragement to Principal
- D intended to assist or encourage
- D’s knowledge of the essential elements of Principal’s offence
3) P and D work together in crime - then P commits another (different) crime which D had foreseen P might commit. - MOST CONTROVERSIAL
R. v Chan Wing-Siu [1985]
3 co-conspirators went to Victim’s flat - 2 of them stabbed V.
D - convicted of murder using JEL.
Admitted that he knew the others had taken knives to the premises.
Held to be sufficient foresight - killing V was a possibility.
OLD MENS REA REQUIREMENT PRE JOGEE:
To incur parasitic liability, mental element of secondary offender need only be foresight of the possibility that the principal might commit the 2nd crime.
Thus, on proving such foresight, secondary = murderer even if not necessarily possessing intention to assist with the 2nd crime.
Mens rea requirement was LESS for secondary than principal, despite being given same conviction and label.
R. v GNANGO [2011]
Authority for the doctrine of transferred malice.
Gunfight across park - innocent bystander killed.
Both parties jointly liable for murder, regardless of who delivered the fatal shot.
Malice at trying to shoot each other TRANSFERS to the innocent bystander.
Concerning stats on JEL, (Bureau of Investigative Journalism)
2013
121 cases prosecuted using JEL
423 Ds
= For every 1 murder, 4 people being held liable for murder.
Dewaye Lock
Recent high profile case
Jordan Cunliffe
15 - convicted of murder using JEL
JC - partially blind.
Argued - just present at the scene, did not take part in it.
Defence: couldn’t have really known what was happening.
Given 12 years.
Alexander Henry
Another recent controversial JEL case.
Argued that he fled the scene before stabbing and that was unaware that principal had knife.
Prosecution disregarded - wasn’t clear who had knife –> in order to convict, just need to prove that HE ‘CAME TO THE AID’ OF THE PRINCIPAL.’
Gary Dobson and David Norris
Convicted of murder of Stephen Lawrence using JEL.
Sufficient evidence they were ‘part of the group’.
Positive use of JEL?
High profile, racial murder, - without JEL, no way of finding anyone criminally liable ever for the murder.
R. v Powell and English
Along with R. v Chan Wing-Sui - authority for old mens rea requirement of secondary offender pre Jogee
Foresight of POSSIBILITY that principal might commit 2nd crime.
R. v JOGEE [2016]
NEW MENS REA FOR SECONDARY OFFENDER - PARASITIC LIABILITY.
Secondary: foresight is evidence of intention, NOT substitute for it.
ONLY LIABLE IF HE INTENDS TO ENCOURAGE/ASSIST THE PRINCIPAL IN THE 2ND CRIME.
