PARTIES Flashcards
Liability: s66(1)(a) CA61
Parties to Offences s66(1)(a) CA61
Everyone is a party to and guilty of an offence who:
- Actually commits the offence
Liability: s66(1)(b) CA61
Parties to Offences s66(1)(b) CA61
Everyone is a party to and guilty of an offence who:
Does/omits an act
For purpose of aiding
Any person
To commit the offence
Liability: s66(1)(c) CA61
Parties to Offences s66(1)(c) CA61
Everyone is a party to and guilty of an offence who:
Abets
Any person
In the commission of the offence
Liability: s66(1)(d) CA61
Parties to Offences s66(1)(d) CA61
Everyone is a party to and guilty of an offence who:
Incites, counsels, or procures
Any person
To commit the offence
Liability: Parties to Offence s66(2) CA61
Parties to Offence s66(2) CA61
2 or more persons
Form a common intention
To prosecute any unlawful purpose
And to assist each other therein
Each is party to every offence committed by any one of them
If the offence was a probable consequence
When charging the accused as a PARTY, is it necessary that the underlying offence was complete
Yes. An offence must have been successfully committed
To be a PARTY to an offence, when must participation have occurred?
(a) Before the offence
(b) During the offence
(c) After the offence
(d) all of the above
(e) (a) and/or (b)
(e) (a) and/or (b)
Can someone be a PARTY to an offence by mere recklessness to whether there was assistance or encouragement?
What case law deals with this point?
No. There must be intent rather than just recklessness.
R v Pene
A PARTY MUST INTENTIONALLY HELP or ENCOURAGE - it is insufficient if they were reckless as to whether the principal was assisted or encouraged.
Who is a PRINCIPAL party?
The person(s) who is liable under s66(1)(a).
They personally satisfy the MENS REA and the ACTUS REUS of the offence.
Who is a SECONDARY PARTY?
Someone who doesn’t themselves commit the offence. But, their assistance, abetment, incitement, counseling or procurement is sufficient to make them culpable as a secondary party under s66(1)(b)(c) and (d).
Is it possible to have more than one PRINCIPAL offender?
Yes.
What are the TWO METHODS which
multiple offenders can become PRINCIPAL offenders:
Method 1: EACH commit the full ACTUS REUS
Method 2: JOINTLY their actions combined form the ACTUS REUS
Both are still required to hold the MENS REA
What can be done in cases where the PRINCIPAL offender of the PARTY can’t be distinguished? (Eg which one delivered the fatal blow?)
What case law provides guidance on this?
R v Renata
The court held that 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 by s66(1).
A secondary offenders actions are CONTEMPORANEOUS or EARLIER than the actions of the principal offender.
True / False
True. Their actions can’t aid the principal offender to commit the crime if the crime has already happened.
A person is part of the ORIGINAL PLANNING of the offence and there role was to provide a means of escape AFTER the crime. Which is TRUE?
(a) They are not a PRINCIPAL because they didn’t form part of the ACTUS REUS of the crime.
(b) They are a PRINCIPAL because they were involved in the PLANNING which is an ACTUS REUS of the crime.
(c) They are a SECONDARY OFFENDER because they didn’t actually do the act, the crime can still occur without their involvement.
(d) They are not a SECONDARY OFFENDER because their actions to aid the crime occur AFTER the crime has been committed. They are an ACCESSORY.
(b)
When a PARTY provides AID, is it required at some point that they are physically present at the scene?
No. The only requirement is that they helped the PRINCIPAL in some manner. It may have been PHYSICAL assistance, or it may have been NON PHYSICAL such as giving advice or information.
If a SECONDARY helps a PRINCIPAL, is it necessary that the principal knew he was being helped by the secondary for the secondary to be culpable?
No.
If a SECONDARY helps a PRINCIPAL, is it necessary that the principal knew he was being helped by the secondary?
No.
For a SECONDARY to be charged, is it required that the PRINCIPAL agreed to be assisted?
No. But it may make it a bit more difficult to prove the assistance.
To be a party, is it necessary that there was PRIOR AGREEMENT between the PRINCIPAL and SECONDARY before or during the offence?
No. The only requirement is that the secondary HELPED the principal. For example: Standing as a lookout.
What is the case law around PROOF of ASSISTANCE for a party offence?
Larkins v Police
While it UNNECESSARY THAT THE PRINCIPAL SHOULD BE AWARE that he is being assisted, THERE MUST BE PROOF OF ACTUAL ASSISTANCE.
What does ABET mean?
Urge, instigate or encourage.
Can PRESENCE at the scene qualify that person as a SECONDARY to the offence?
Mere-presence would not qualify them. But, if their presence was an ENCOURAGEMENT to the PRINCIPAL carrying out the offence, then YES.
Aiding by Omission:
Can PASSIVE ACQUIESCENCE be a form of ABETTING?
Yes. But it would require that the SECONDARY had some duty to ACT.
