Parties Cases Flashcards
R v Paterson
Innocent agency
An innocent agent will not be liable, and a party who procures another to commit an offence for them can be viewed as ‘constructively performing’ the AR of the offence.
Ngamu v R
It doesn’t matter is a parties actions are not unlawful if they are still committing part of the AR of the offence (and have necessary MR).
Ahsin v R
- Sets out requirements of withdrawal
- Encouragement does not need to remain operative at the time the principal offence is committed.
Larkins v Police
Aiding
Facts:
- Principal party unaware of Larkins actions
Held:
Primary requirements for aiding
Charnley v R
Omissions
Presence principle and duty principle in relation to omissions
R v Clarkson
Omissions
Presence indicated encouragement.
R v Pene
Omissions
Facts:
- Molotov cocktails
- Tried to withdraw
Held:
- Still liable
- Had intention to act
R v Witika
Omissions
Failure to act may be encouragement if there is a special relationship with the victim giving rise to a duty to intervene
- Special relationship = defacto partners, spouses, children and parents
Johnson v Youden
Knowledge of essential matters test for MR
!R v Baker
Knowing the nature / character / kind / class of offence contemplated is enough
R v Bainbridge
General knowledge of something illegal is enough
!R v Maxwell
If you are aware a range of offences could occur, you have sufficient knowledge if one does
R v Kimura
Secondary liability MR
Burglary and aggrivated burglary are different
Not the same type of offence
R v Hartley
Different offences
Heta v Police
Does not matter he acted out of fear
R v Curtis
Section 66(2)
Held:
- Must have evidence of common intention
- Proof of actual assistance / encouragement is not needed
R v Nathan
Section 66(2)
If you cannot prove a specific principal party, cannot attach liability through 66(2)
R v Hubbard
Section 66(2)
- The cases where this apply are rare
R v Te Moni
Section 66(2)
Secondary party saw murder as a reasonable outcome
R v Cogan and Leak
Facts:
Although a man cannot rape his wife using his own body, if a man uses an innocent agent to do it, the man can be guilty of raping his wife
R v Cooper
Brought R v Cogan and Leak into NZ law
R v Shriek
Rules for encouraging:
1. There must be proof that actual or real encouragement was given.
2. The 1º party must be aware that the encouragement was given
- In group, just need to be aware of group encouragement
3. The encouragement does not need to be the or a reason the 1º party committed the offence.
4. In certain situations, the mere voluntary presence of the 2º party will qualify as abetting
5. The encouragement does not need to be operative when the principal offence is committed.
R v Brough
Merely having the power to act is not enough for 2º liability omission
R v Hagen
Held:
There can be some special situations where it is appropriate to charge both 66(1) and 66(2) as alternatives
R v Gush
Section 66(2)
- Probable = means the event could well happen
- Not a balance of probabilities test
