Complicity

Question 1

What does the law of complicity say main statute

Answer 1

Accessories and Abettors Act 1861, s.8
Whoever

1.) Aid
2.) Abet
3.) Counsel
4.) Procure

Shall be liable to be tried indicted and punished as a principal offender

Question 2

Elements of Joint Participation (Secondary Liability)

Answer 2

**AR **
- Doing acts of assistance or encouragement

Mens Rea
- Intending to do those acts
- Intending P to kill intentionally or GBH
- D has knowledge of the existing facts

Defences
- Overwheming supervening event/ act of P
- Withdrawal by D
- Being a victim

Question 3

Assistance (to what part of the test is it relevant)?

Answer 3

It is relevant to the AR of Joint Participation

• D did acts to assist principal
• Causation not required (D did not cause P)
• Mere Association is not enough
• BUT if D contributed to force of numbers or let D know he was to provide back up -> Assistance is satisfied

Doing Acts of Encouragement or Assistance

Question 4

Which case establishes mere presence does not amount to abetting

Answer 4

R v Clarkson

Question 5

R v Clarkson

Answer 5

Which case establishes mere presence does not amount to abetting

Question 6

Encouragement

Answer 6

• D needs to have performed acts of encouragement
• P needs to be aware of those;
• Question of fact whether they are sufficiently connected to P’s crime
• No need to cause result, no need to have any effect on P
  Jogee para 12.

Question 7

R v Coney

Answer 7

It was held that the presence of the audience during an illegal prize fight did not constitute encouraging.

Encouraging as the first element of AR

Question 8

Rowe [2022]

Answer 8

D’s** encouragement of P does not need to have any effect on the events

Question 9

Mens Rea

Answer 9

• Intending to do those acts
• Intending P to do intentionally kill or GBH
• Knowing any relevant facts for the offence

Question 10

(1) D’s intent to assist/encourage

Answer 10

**R v Jogee ** - We must ask whether the accessory intended to encourage or assist D1 to commit the crime

Eg NOT where D has left information unsecure and P happens to find it; or has left a weapon unsecured and P takes it

Question 11

(2) D intended that P would have the mens rea required for the offence.

Answer 11

Anwar - Accessory must intend (even conditionally) to assist or encourage the crime

Brown (2017) - D must share P’s intention to cause serious harm

Noble - Jury must find D intended to encourage/assist deliberate serious harm (of a specific crime)

D intended P to commit the crime

Question 11

(3) D has knowledge of the existing facts

Answer 11

Comes from Jogee

Caselaw helps adress this

Saik: Knowledge = True Belief

Bainbridge : Sufficient D knows type of crime

DPP v Maxwell: Sufficien D knows crime will be one of a limited number D anticipates

Know the facts that make P’s actions a crime (but not necessarily know the law).

Question 12

R v Bryce

Answer 12

The first way is that there only needs to be foresight of a real possibility that an offence would be committed by the principal

Question 13

Defences

Answer 13

1.) Withdrawal

2.) Victim

3.) Overwhelming Supervening Act

Question 14

Withdrawal

Answer 14

A may withdraw through effective unequivocal communication to P - **Becerra and Cooper **

Mere absence of scene of crime does not suffice withdrawal - Rook

In spontaneous violence abandonment or withdrawal counts - O’Flaherty

Question 15

Can Victims be Accessories?

Answer 15

** R v Tyrrell ** -

**R v Gnango ** - No common law rule precludes victim

Question 16

Overwhelming Supervening Act

Answer 16

Where P commits crime in a way that is so extreme and unexpected that no one in D’s position could have predicted them

Then they are not liable