Download
participation n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Participation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Participation

Participation

61 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Participation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Participation Criminal Law A2 Mrs Howe

  2. Lesson Objectives Classify the different roles a person can take within a crime Explain how the Defendants role in a crime effects how they are dealt with at court. Explain the problems courts have with sentencing secondary offenders Mrs Howe

  3. Ways of Been Involved in an Offence-Parties to an offence • Principal offender (perpetrator) A person who directly commits a crime • Secondary offender (accessory, accomplice) Someone who helps the principle offender commit a crime • Joint offenders- where more than one person directly commit the crime • Innocent parties( Innocent Agent)- A person who the principle offender uses to commit the act. Mrs Howe

  4. Actus Reus For Secondary Offenders • Secondary party must :- • Aid Abet Procure or counsel the commission of an offence. • S8 of the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 • Each of these four words has a separate meaning Attorney generals Reference no1 of 1975 Mrs Howe

  5. Aid • Is giving assistance, support or help to someone. (ASH) • Can be before the offence is committed e.g. providing tools- Bainbridge 1959 • Or during the offence- e.g. look out Mrs Howe

  6. Abetting • Any conduct which instigates, incites or encourages the commission of an offence • Can be before or during the committing of offence • Encouragement can be as little as a pat on the back • Must be an active involvement to encourage-(Wilcox and Jeffrey 1951) • Mere presence not enough (R v Coney and others 1882) (Clarkson and others 1971) • unless duty to control principle offender (Tuck V Robson 1970) Mrs Howe

  7. Procure Procure means to produce by endeavour Setting out to see that it happens and taking appropriate steps to produce that happening. Rules set out in Attorney General No 1 1975 However subsequent cases have shown not necessary to show D set out to produce result by endeavour . The need for a casual link is the more important factor. Did D’s act cause the offence to be committed? Millward 1984 Mrs Howe

  8. Counsel Is Advising, Assisting or Encouraging. Takes place before the commission of the offence. Calhaem 1985 Mrs Howe

  9. Activity • Look at the scenarios on page 48 of Criminal Law for A2 – J. Martin • Consider whether anyone has aided, abetted, counselled or procured. • You must be able to explain your answer having regard to decided cases 12mins Mrs Howe

  10. Activity Answers 1.Bethany has aided Alvin to be able to hack into computers by giving him the knowledge to do this. (helped him). She had knowledge of what he was going to use the information for. 2.Carly actively encouraged Damien to continue attacking Ella so has abetted Damien I commission of offence. Wilcox and Jeffrey 1951, R v Clarkson and others 1971, R V Coney and others 1882 3.Flint has aided Greg to commit a crime by giving him the screwdriver (actus reus) but does not have the mens rea (intention) to aid and abet the crime. 4.Hal has procured Ian in the offence of dangerous driving. Hal has brought about the offence by getting Ian to move the caravan when he knew it was unsafe. Millward 1984 (AR) National Coal board V gamble 1958 (MR) Mrs Howe

  11. Mens Rea For Secondary Offender Must have an intention to aid, abet, procure or counsel the act of the main offence. National Coal board V Gamble 1958 Do not need to agree the conduct- shared intention SO blocks exit of person PO fighting- PO not aware of aid given If Secondary offender procure offence do not need shared intention Can be guilty even if D does not care offence committed Need only have knowledge a crime will be committed. Does not need to know all details – Bainbridge 1959 Mrs Howe

  12. Joint enterprise, where two or more D have agreed to carry out one crime together. Problems arise when during committing agreed offence one D commits another offence, are other D liable for this new offence? Rule-If Secondary offender foresaw or contemplated that the principle offender might commit a certain type of other offence, then can be guilty of other offence English1997 and Powell 1997 Means a lower level of intention is sufficient to convict a secondary offender of murder!!!! Mrs Howe

  13. Different Act Where the Principal offender does a completely different act, then the secondary offender is not liable for that offence. English 1997, Powell 1997 Where secondary offender knows Principal has a weapon but did not foresee or contemplate use of or outcome – not guilty Mrs Howe

  14. Activity • Look at the scenarios on page 53 of Criminal Law for A2 – J. Martin • Consider whether the defendants in the scenario have the required mens rea to be a secondary offender. • You must be able to explain your answer having regard to decided cases 12mins Mrs Howe

  15. What happens when D wants to Withdraw From Joint Enterprise • Where D has taken part in planning and preparing for an offence then does not want to go through with it, he must make his withdrawal clear and effective. • Simply not turning up or saying not doing it. May not be enough. Rook 1993 and Becerra and Cooper . 1975 • The more D has done, the more effective his withdrawal must be. Mrs Howe

  16. Spontaneous Offences • Where spontaneous offences occur it is possible for secondary party to withdraw from offence by walking away • Mitchell V King 1998 • Fight in restaurant, continued on street. Both involved, D1 dropped stick, stopped fighting walked away. D2 picked up stick and carried on beating V. V later died. Walking away was considered enough for withdrawal in this case Mrs Howe

  17. Summary Principal offender- directly commits a crime Secondary offender- helps commit a crime Joint offenders- more than directly commits the crime Innocent parties- A person who is used to commit a crime The Actus Reus must have been committed by Principle Offender for Secondary Offender to be found guilty. Thornton V Mitchell 1940 Secondary offender can be guilty even if principal not- Millward 1984 Actus Rea for secondary offender is Aid, Abet, Procure or counsel principle offender. Did SO actions bring about offence/enable it to be committed. Mens Rea for secondary offender is did they have intention to aid, abet, counsel or procure. Mrs Howe

  18. Summary Aid-Advice, Support or Help in committing a crime Bainbridge 1959 – occurs before or during crime Abet- Instigate, Incite or Encourage committing of an offence- before or during crime Must be active encouragement (R V Coney and others 1882), mere presence not enough (Clarkson and others 1971), encourage can be something as simple as a pat on back or buying a ticket for illegal gig (Wilcox V Jeffrey 1951) Procure- Produce by endeavour-making something happen- before crime Important to show D actions cause the offence to be committed (casual link) Millward 1984 Counsel- Assistance, Advising, Encouragement, before event- No need to prove casual link between Secondary offenders actions and Principle offenders act . Where Principle Offender changes agreed plan or encouraged action secondary offender can still be liable Calhaem 1985 Mrs Howe

  19. Summary Withdrawal- must be made clear. Not turning up or running away does not constitute withdrawal Becerra and Cooper 1975 Rook 1993 Mrs Howe

  20. Giannetto 1997 D convicted of the murder of his wife. The prosecution relied on the fact that the wife had been murdered either by D or by a hired killer on D’s behalf. D appealed on the basis that, as the prosecution could not prove whether he or another person had killed his wife, he should have been acquitted. C of A held that as he had the intention to murder and the act had been carried out, it did not matter whether he was principle or second party Mrs Howe

  21. Millward- 1984 • D was a farmer who gave instructions for a poorly maintained tractor and trailer to be driven on main road. • Because of poor maintenance the trailer became detached, hit a car, killed driver, • D convicted of procuring the offence of causing death by reckless driving. Even though he did not set out to produce this result by endeavour. • By ordering principle offender to drive the tractor when he knew of its poor state of repair his actions (orders and knowledge) caused/contributed to the crime. Mrs Howe

  22. Wilcox and Jeffrey 1951 • Man bought concert ticket for saxophonist who was in country illegally- • encouraged committing of offence-abetting D to commit a crime Mrs Howe

  23. Tuck V Robson 1970 • Pub landlord did not serve after ours but allowed people to carry on drinking after hours (drinks they had bought before) convicted of aiding and abetting breaches of licensing laws. • Must vacate pub within 30 mins of time. • presence is enough to convict secondary offender Mrs Howe

  24. R V Coney and Others 1882 A bare knuckle fight was taking place at the side of the road- 3 people stopped to watch- did not encourage- do anything. Convicted of aiding and abetting crime. C 0f A decided not guilty on grounds only intentional encouragement can be aiding and abetting. Stand in silence doing nothing is not active involvement. Must be intentional encouragement. Must do something to encourage, mere presence not enough. Mrs Howe

  25. R V Clarkson and Others 1971 • D and an other soldier entered barracks where a woman was being raped, they remained in room and did nothing- • held not aiding and abetting. Mrs Howe

  26. Becerra and Cooper 1975 B & C broke into a house to steel. B gave C a knife to use if anyone interrupted them. When they were interrupted by V, B said there is a bloke coming. Lets go and jumped out of the window. C stabbed and killed V. Both B & C were convicted of murder. Jumping out of the window and running off was not sufficient for withdrawal at this late stage in the joint enterprise. B needed to do something more effective. What do you think would be enough? Mrs Howe

  27. Rook 1993 D discussed a plan to murder V. When the others came round to collect him to go commit the offence, D was absent. He claimed he absented himself because he no longer intended to take part in the crime. He did not tell the others he was withdrawing from the offence. The decision in Becerra was confirmed. D could not withdraw simply by absenting himself. There had to be unequivocal communication with the others of his withdrawal. Mrs Howe

  28. English 1997 • D took part with another man, W in joint enterprise to attack and injure a police officer with wooden posts. • During attack, W stabbed and killed the office. • D did not know that W was carrying a knife. • Conviction quashed, not foreseen result Mrs Howe

  29. Powell 1997 • D and two other men went to buy drugs at the house of a drug dealer. When D opened door, one of the other men shot him. • D prosecuted on basis that he knew one of men had a gun and it might be used to kill or cause serious injury. • D’s conviction up held. Foreseeable consequence. Mrs Howe

  30. Task Write a summary of the cases and rules on participation in offences 20 mins What are your thoughts on a secondary offender been committed for murder with a lesser level of mens rea. Give reasons for your answer. 15mins J.Martin, Criminal Law for A2, Hodder Arnold, 2006

  31. Question • What is the difference between perpetrators and accessories? • What is another name for secondary party? • What might accessories do to help in the commission of an offence? • What piece of legislation covers accessories? • What is an innocent party/agent? • Is an accessory liable if the perpetrator has no mens rea. -Case • What is the mens rea for an accessory? • Define aid and abet • What is counselling in the context of accessories? • What does procuring mean? J, O’Riordan A2 Law for OCR, Heinemann, 2003