Criminal Law - Parties to a crime

what is a principal (P) offender?

- the person who, w// appropriate mens rea, commits the actus reus of the offence

- it is always possible to have more than 1 principle

who are innocent agents?

- a person may guilty as a P, even if the other person actually performs the actus reus

- occurs where the person acting can be described as an 'innocent agent' e.g., person is under the age of criminal liability or is deceived as to what they are doing

R v Michael principal offender (poison)

a women gave a child a dose of poison and then the child gave it to the V; the women is held to be the P offender

what are the 5 ways someone can be liable as an accessory?

1) to aid

2) to abet

3) to counsel

4) to procure

5) to be a party to joint enterprise

- w// the exception of procuring; these can be summarised as 'assisting or encouraging the commission of the principal's offence'

what are the 5 ways to have actus reus for accessorial liability?

1) to aid P in committing the offence

2) to abet P in committing the offence

3) to counsel P in committing the offence

4) to procure P to commit the offence

5) to be a party to a joint enterprise w// P regarding the 1 offence and during the enterprise P commits a 2nd different offence

what is the mens rea for accessorial liability?

- an intention to assist or encourage the principal's conduct

- if the crime requires a mens rea, an intention that the principal will do the actus reus w// that mens rea (procuring would appear to be an exception to this rule)

- knowledge of existing facts or circumstances necessary for the offence to be criminal

what is withdrawal?

a secondary party may change their mind and want to withdraw their help or encouragement

what is the general rule on withdrawal?

the general rule is that it is not enough to have a change of mind; something must be done and, at the very least, the withdrawal must be communicated to P or a law enforcement agency; further acts ma be required depending on the circumstances of the case

when must the withdrawal take place?

- b/c the mens rea for assistance is the time of the act not the time when the principal commits the crime

- the withdrawal must take place before the act of assistance

- where D has supplied the P w// the means of committing the crime and has given assistance, this will be less easily neutralised than where D has just given advice

R v Becerra withdrawal

B gave C a knife to use but then said 'come on lets go'; CoA held something vastly diff and more effective was required for sufficient communication of withdrawal

can you withdraw from spontaneous violence?

communication of withdrawal was only required in cases of pre-planned violence, not necessary when violence is spontaneous

what is conviction of secondary party and acquittal of principal?

- conviction of a secondary party and acquittal of the P is possible and could occur when the P has been acquitted due to the insufficient evidence or the P could not be found

- as long as it is clear that someone has committed the offence to which D was a secondary party, D can be convicted

- another way D can be convicted and P can be acquitted is where P has the AR and MR but has a defence e.g., R v Bourne defence = marital coercion

what is the general rule on secondary party and acquittal of principal?

- if it cannot be proved which of the 2 people committed the crime, both must be acquitted

- h/e if it can be proved that the one who did not commit the crime as P was the a secondary party, then both can be convicted

interaction of secondary party with an attempt?

not an offence to attempt to aid, abet, counsel or procure an offence but it is an offence to actually do so

actus reus of secondary parties: procuring meaning?

- procuring means to produce by endeavour

- there must be a causal link between D's act and the commission of the offence

actus reus of secondary parties: aiding meaning?

- requires accessory to give help, support or assistance to the P carrying out the principal offence

- e.g., holding down a V in assault

- there need be no causation in the sense but for the assistance the crime. would not happen

- an accessory before the fact is one who help the crime and would come under the category of 'aiding'

actus reus of secondary parties: counselling meaning?

- held to mean giving advice or encouragement before the commission of the offence

- need be no causal link but there must be contact between the parties and a connection between the counselling and the offence

- act must be done within the scope of the advice and the P must know of the counselling ie consensus

actus reus of secondary parties: abetting meaning?

- to incite, instigate or encourage

- means encouraging at the time the offence is being committed; this is contrast to counselling which is encouraging before the commission of the offence

- need be no causal link and there must be communication; the principal must know they are being abetted

is it possible to abet by mere presence?

- yes possible but not always

- presence at H's concert H is not permitted to work at, W wrote an article about it and was held that W's presence at the concert was an encouragement of the offence

is failure to prevent an offence considered abetting?

where D has the right or duty to control the actions of another and deliberately refrains from exercising it, D's inactivity may be a positive encouragement to the other to perform an illegal act and would therefore be abetting

what is a joint enterprise?

- where 2 or more people are committing a crime together

- in joint enterprise case, at the time of the accessorial offence, the accomplice was committing another offence w// the P

- in a simple case of aiding, abetting etc, the accomplice is not committing an offence as a P

what are they key principles of joint enterprise?

- to be liable under this principle, there is no need to show that D2 aided or encouraged the offence; it is enough that D2 was a party to the joint enterprise and had the relevant mens rea for an accessory

- important requirement = B must be committed in the course of or be incidental to crime A

- a party cannot be liable for any offence committed before they join the enterprise

what is the 3 part mens rea for joint enterprise?

1) an intention to assist or encourage the principal's conduct

2) if the crime requires MR, an intention that the P will do the AR w// that MR (procuring would appear to be an exception to this rule)

3) knowledge of existing facts or circumstances necessary for the offence to be criminal

- if the crime requires particular intent, D2 must intend to assist or encourage D1 to act w// such intent

what are the elements of mens rea: an intention to aid or encourage?

- 2 elements, D must intend to:

1) to do the act which aids or encourages; and

2) it to aid or encourage the commission of the crime

- it is sufficient D intended their act might assist the crime, even if it cannot be said that it definitely will do so

what is considered in the mens rea element: an intention that P will commit the crime with the necessary mens rea?

- 2 issues will be considered:

1) conditional intention; and

2) crimes where the MR does not correspond to AR

what is conditional intention for joint enterprise?

- it is enough that D has a conditional intent that P will commit a crime w// the necessary MR

- particularly helpful in cases of joint enterprise

- best to consider that D's attitude would be if P committed the crime (ie if D = pleased or accepting; find conditional intent whereas dismay = oblique intent)

what happens for crimes where the mens rea does not correspond to the actus reus?

D1 will be liable if they intend D2 to do serious harm to the V even if they did not intend for murder to be committed

what is meant by mens rea: knowledge of the facts or circumstances?

- if the offence requires goods to be stolen, D needs to know that they are stolen

- if the offence requires lack of consent, D must know that the V does not consent

- if they don't know, they lack the mens rea

what is required to have the mens rea for: knowledge of the facts or circumstances?

- knowledge includes wilful blindness; a D who deliberately shuts their eyes to the obvious will be deemed to have knowledge

- D need not know the exact details of the crime which will be committed; D does not need to know the identity of the V or the day on which the crime was committed

- know the type of crime that is being committed

- also enough to know P may commit any 1 of the number of crimes including the principal does in fact commit

what is the liability for D with lesser intent? (Jogee)

if a person is party to a violent attack on another, w//o any intent to assist in the causing of death or really serious harm, but the violence escalates and results in death, that person will be not guilty as an accessory to murder but can be guilty as a principal for the crime of manslaughter