SHORT ANSWERS - HINTS II Flashcards
Section 243 - Crimes Act 1961 defines the term “Offence” as it relates to the Money Laundering and Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009.
In this context, what is that definition of “offence”?
Means an offence (or any offence described as a crime) that is punishable under NZ law including any act, wherever committed, that would be an offence in NZ if committed in NZ.
Being a “party to an offence” often relates to assistance given to the principal offender by a secondary offender.
What was held in the case Larkins v Police in relation to parties to offences?
While it is unnecessary that the principal should be aware that he or she is being assisted, there must be proof of actual assistance.
Section 72 - Crimes Act 1961 does not in itself create an offence of “attempt”. It is simply a definition of attempt that applies to all offences.
What 3 elements or conditions must be proved in a case of an attempt to commit an offence?
- Intent (Mens Rea) to commit an offence
- Act (Actus Reus) that they did, or omitted to do something to achieve that end
- Proximity that their act or omission was sufficiently close
The circumstances in which property was received may alone be sufficient to justify a finding that the property was stolen, and an inference of guilty knowledge.
List 8 circumstances that could indicate guilty knowledge in relation to a charge of receiving.
- Possession of recently stolen goods
- Nature of the property stolen i.e. type, value, quantity
- Purchase at gross undervalue
- Secrecy in receiving the property
- Receipt of goods at an unusual place
- Receipt of goods at an unusual time
- Receipt of goods in an unusual way
- Concealment of property to avoid discovery
- Removal of identifying marks or features
- Steps taken to disguise property (remove serial numbers/painting)
- Lack of original packaging
- Type of person good received from
- Mode of Payment
- Absence of receipt where receipt would usually be issued
- False statement as to the source of goods
- False statement as to the date of acquisition
- Nature of the explanation given e.g., false/inconsistent/no reasonable explanation
- False denial of knowledge/existence
Bruce and Peter have committed an aggravated robbery whereupon Bruce has killed someone in an attempt to flee the scene.
Under what circumstances does a person become “a party to an offence” as set out in Section 66(2) Crimes Act 1961?
Where 2 or more persons form as common intention to prosecute an unlawful purpose and to assist each other in doing so, each of them is a party to every offence committed by an one of them in the prosecution of the common purpose if the commission of that offence was known to be a probable consequence of the prosecution of the common purpose.
You are conducting an interview relating to an Accessory after the Fact. What knowledge must you establish that the suspect had?
Knowledge that:
- An offence has been committed AND
- The person they are assisting was a party (principal or secondary) to that offence.
Party to a secondary offence is found in Section 66(2) of the Crimes Act 1961.
With regard to investigative procedure, how might you establish whether a person has been a party to an offence?
- Reconstruction of the offence committed. (see whether there was one or more persons involved)
- A suspect or witness admitting to providing aid or assistance when interviewed
- A witness providing you with evidence of another person’s involvement based on their observations.
- Receiving information indicating that others were involved in the offence.
The facts of R v Renata are that 3 offenders beat a person to death in a carpark of a Tavern, all were subsequently put before the Court.
What were the main points held in the matter of R v Renata in relation to parties to offences?
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 Section 66(1).
The Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 provides legislation that is designed to disrupt the accumulation of assets through criminal activity.
How is the term “tainted property” defined under Section 5 - Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009?
Means any property that has, wholly or in part, been
i) acquired as a result of significant criminal activity; or
ii) directly or indirectly derived from significant criminal activity and
includes any property that has been acquired as a result of, or directly or indirectly, derived from, more that 1 activity if at least 1 or those activities is a significant criminal activity.
A motorcycle dealer continually sells Harley Davidson bikes to known gang members who are paying cash. The dealer is warned that he is making a profit from ill-gotten gains.
Define the term “unlawfully benefited from criminal activity” in accordance with Section 7 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009.
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, A person has unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity if the person has knowingly, directly or indirectly, derived a benefit from significant criminal activity (whether or not that person undertook or was involved in the significant criminal activity).
You arrest Mike and Kim for planning to blow up Parliament and the NZ public is in your debt for having stopped the offence whilst it was still in its infancy.
While investigating an allegation of conspiracy what are the particular matters that should be covered when obtaining suspect statements?
- The existence of an agreement to commit an offence
- The existence of an agreement to omit to do something that would amount to an offence the intent of those involved
- Whether anything was written, said or done to further the common purpose
- The identity of all people concerned where possible
“Fabricating Evidence” falls under offences under the banner of Misleading Justice.
What are the 2 essential elements of the offence of ‘Fabricating Evidence’ under Section 113 - Crimes Act 1961?
With intent to mislead any tribunal holding any judicial proceeding
Fabricates evidence by any means other than perjury.
Cullen v R provides the Court with a test that can assist in determining possession of receiving.
With regard to this case law, what are the elements that must be proven?
4 Elements of possession for receiving are:
- Awareness that the item is where it is
- Awareness that the item has been stolen
- Actual or potential control of the item AND
- An intention to exercise that control over the item
