Party Liability and Inchoate Offences Flashcards
Party Liability
Beyond the principal or person who actually engages in the conduct
Examples of Party Liability
- intention in common to carry out…
- Aiding or Abetting
- ## equally responsible in law as the principle (depending on the offence)
Actus Reus and Mens Rea in relation to Party Liability
Both of these are separate from the offence
- mens rea is usually the intent to assist
- you don’t necessarily need to carry out the crime to the whole effect to fulfill mens rea
- there must also be knowledge of what the principal is intending to do
- actus reus includes encouraging and promoting, procuring or instigating an offence
R v. Dunlop and Sylvester 1979
The accused MUST TAKE ACTIVE STEP to HELP OR COMPLY
Facts: no participation in the assault, with no evidence that they aided or abetted
Issue: does mere presence at the scene of the crime sufficient enough to establish liability as a party?
The border between principal and party is highly blurred during the conviction process
standing by and allowing crime to happen (or passive acquiesce) does not create liability
Reasoning: may not be safe to do so to interfere and there is no legal duty
R v. Jackson
Additional actus reus regarding aiding or abetting
Ruling: evidence of participation beyond mere presence was needed; the court must consider the totality of the circumstances, and still he was not charged
Facts: marijuana plantation with nothing around the area; is he guilty for being near the scene?
R v Briscoe
Wilful blindness and Party Liability
Ruling: wilfully blind of the intended plan of the principal, and is, therefore, guilty as a party
Wilful blindness to the principal’s plan can substitute the mens rea for aiding and abetting
Elements of Party Liability?
- intention in common
- unlawful purpose
- intent to assist each other in carrying out the unlawful purpose; in the process, one commits a different offence
- there must be substantial effort to carry out the purpose (Dunlop and Sylvester)
- abandonment of common intention has to be unequivocal, communicated and must happen before the offence
R v Logan
Is objective foresight sufficient to convict a person for party liability?
Ruling: The same degree of mens rea is applicable to both the principal and the party, and thus they cannot convict the party of a lesser mens rea
- thus the minimum degree of mens rea should be no less than the principal
R v Jackson 1993
Can a party be convicted of a different offence than the principal?
Answer: Yes
Facts: divergence in stories causes the jury to consider liability independently to assess their changes
A reasonable person in all the circumstances would have foreseen at least a risk of harm to another as a result of carrying out the common intention
Inchoate Offences
The offences that predate the crime; they are preliminary, or in preparation of the crime.
The actus reus of inchoate offences is that they must act on what is described in the provision
R v Janeteas
What is the mens rea of counselling?
Ruling: Two elements are required to prove the mens rea
- Intent to counsel the offence
- Intent for the offence to be carried out
**recklessness is not sufficient to prove mens rea
R v Dery
Limitations to Criminal Liability; Can you be convicted for attempting to conspire?
Musing is not a criminal act; it is only after you’ve formed an agreement that there is a meaningful risk of harm and thus should be convicted
Ruling: not guilty
Conspiracy and Inchoate Offences
Conspiring on various level entails different severity in punishment
Actus Reus: formation of an agreement to commit an offence
Mens rea: intent to agree and intent that the agreement will be carried out
You may not even have to be part of carrying out the agreement, as long as you had agreed
It must also be bilateral
