Multiple Parties Flashcards
Multiple Parties can be divided into
Principle Offender: physically performs the necessary AR
Secondary Offender: aka an accomplice/ accessory
- a secondary defendant cannot be liable for strict liability (Callow v Tillstone)
Main ways in which multiple offenders may be involved in an offence.
- Joint Principles
- Joint Enterprise
- Aiding, Abetting, Counselling or Procuring.
Joint principals
Each have the necessary AR and MR for the offence.
e. g. both break into a house
- both are guilty of the offence
Joint Enterprise
Where two or more people act with a shared common intention which involves at least one of them committing a crime.
- all people involved are liable for any offence committed by any party to the joint enterprise.
Husband liable for JE for encouraging other men to rape her.
Cogan v Leak
If the acts clearly fall within the joint purpose, the secondary defendant will be liable
Jogee
- D must have encouraged or assisted the commission of the principle offence.
The necessary MR of joint enterprise
D intended to assist or encourage the principal defendant’s commission of the offence.
With knowledge of any facts and circumstances necessary for it to be a prohibited act (National Coal Board v Gamble)
Foresight may be strong evidence that D had the necessary MR, but it is no longer conclusive (Jogee)
What if the principal defendant goes beyond the common purpose
If a person participates be encouragement or assistance in any other unlawful act which all sober and reasonable people would realise carried the risk of some harm to another, and death in fact results, he may be guilty of manslaughter (Jogee)
- the test is objective (R v Church)
Exception to the Jogee rule beyond common purpose
Where the victims death is ‘caused by some overwhelming supervening act’
- the defendant will bear no responsibility for death (Wesley Smith)
Where the accomplice has foreseen and fully contemplated the consequences, he will be liable for ‘the degree of the offence appropriate to the intent with which he acted’
e.g. being liable as an accomplice to manslaughter instead of murder (R v Gilmour)
Post Jogee: foresight may be evidence of intention
R v Crilly
Stewart: foreseeing harm and continuing to participate
Defences for Joint enterprise
Withdrawal from participation
Withdrawal must be more than a mere change on intention
R v Whitefield
To withdraw effectively, one must
Unequivocally communicate his withdrawal (R v Rook)
e.g. trying to persuade the primary defendant not to go ahead before the crime (R v Grundy)
Aid
Give help, support or assistance
Clarkson: Holding down the victim
