Parties to a crime

Question 1

What are the 4 different ways in which an accomplice may satisfy the actus reus of accomplice liability?

Answer 1

Aiding
Abetting
Counselling
Procuring

Question 2

When in relation to the offence can aiding occur?

Answer 2

Before or during the offence

Question 3

When in relation to the offence can abetting occur?

Answer 3

During the offence (NOT before)

Question 4

What constitutes “counselling” for the AR of accomplice liability?

Answer 4

The instigating, soliciting or encouraging, or threatening the principal to commit the offence

Question 5

What is the difference between “counselling” and “abetting”?

Answer 5

Counselling would occur some stage before the offence, whereas abetting would require encouragement of the offence at the scene

Question 6

What is “procuring” in relation to accomplice liability?

Answer 6

Means “to produce by endeavour”, i.e. the accused sets out to achieve a particular state of affairs which bring about the offence

Question 7

When in relation to the offence can procuring occur?

Answer 7

Before the offence (NOT during)

Question 8

Will mere presence at the scene suffice for accomplice liability?

Answer 8

No, some steps are required to have been taken (therefore failure to intervene wouldn’t be sufficient)

Question 9

In what events could someone be criminally liable for their presence at the scene?

Answer 9

1. Attendance was by prior arrangement with the principal - i.e. acting as support
2. Accused encouraged / assisted principle by words and / or actions at the scene of the crime

Question 10

In respect of aiding for accomplice liability, is there the requirement for either a mental or causal link between the accomplice and principal?

Answer 10

No - there is no requirement for the principal to even be aware of the assistance, and no need to establish the help either impacted or influenced their decision to commit the crime

Question 11

If an accomplice is accused of abetting or counselling, is a mental or causal link required to the principal?

Answer 11

A mental link is required - they must have been aware of the encouragement or advice

Question 12

If an accomplice is accused of procuring the offence, is a mental or causal link required to the principal?

Answer 12

A causal link is required

Question 13

In what two events could the accomplice be convicted by the principal is not?

Answer 13

1. Principal has a defence
2. Principal cannot be found

Question 14

What would happen in the event of an innocent agent being used to commit an offence (i.e. someone who commits the AR of the crime but not guilty of the offence as they lack the MR)?

Answer 14

Despite not committing the AR themselves, defendant would be charged as principal offender

Question 15

What are the two elements of the mens rea of accomplice?

Answer 15

1. MR in relation to the act or words that establish the AR
2. Knowledge or awareness of circumstances of principal offence

Question 16

When will an accomplice satisfy the requirement for full knowledge for the MR?

Answer 16

If they intend the principal to commit the AR of the offence with the required MR

Question 17

If the accomplice does not have knowledge of the specific offence that the principal intends to commit, when else can they still have the requisite MR?

Answer 17

1. Where they know the type of crime which will be committed by not the exact details
2. Where they know that the commission of one or more of a range of offences by the principal will take place

Question 18

If the principal offender does the agreed AR but with a different MR to that intended by the accomplice, what offence will the accomplice be guilty of?

Answer 18

They will be guilty as an accomplice to the offence which matches their own AR

I.e. the accomplice may be guilty of a more or less serious offence than the principal based on their own level of MR where different offences share the same AR

Question 19

What happens for the accomplice in the event of the principal offender going beyond the intended plan and commits a more serious offence?

Answer 19

The court must evaluate whether the accomplice intended that the new offence be committed (i.e. intent to assist or encourage in the new offence) - just because they foresee that the new offence might occur does not constitute their intention to DO it

Question 20

If someone is withdrawing before the committing of an offence, what are the communication requirements?

Answer 20

Must be timely and unequivocal - i.e. just not turning up isn’t enough

Question 21

In the event of a defendant deciding to withdraw after the offence has begun, what has the court suggested may be required to constitute effective withdrawal?

Answer 21

Physical intervention