Silence in this Lecture
Parties to a Crime
Please turn off your mobile
Take notes
Raise your hand if you have a question
• Chapter 12 of ‘Criminal Law’ by Diana Roe
• Referred to by OCR as ‘Participation’.
No Food or Drink in this
Classroom
Please place any litter in the bin.
Leave your chair neatly under
the desk when leaving.
1
Parties to a Crime
• In some cases more than one person
will be involved in a crime.
• If two people jointly rob a bank they
commit the offence together and are
joint principals.
• However, if say I rob the bank and a
student stays in the car to drive me
away – the student would be a
secondary offender.
3
• Under s8 Accessories and Abettors Act
1861 (as amended by the Criminal Law
Act 1967)…
• ‘Whosoever shall aid, abet, counsel and
procure the commission of an
indictable offence … shall be liable to
be tried, indicted and punished as a
principal offender.’
Example of Bentley in the
film ‘Let Him Have it!’
PRECIS NOTES
WILL BE CHECKED
5
2
Parties to a Crime
• Secondary offenders can also be referred to as
an accessory or an accomplice. Some old cases
even class such an offender as a principal in
the second degree.
4
• Under s44 Magistrates Courts Act
1980 the same approach is taken with
regard to summary offences.
6
1
Issues …
The Principal Offender
• Despite such a legal position it can still be
important to distinguish between principle
offenders and accomplices.
1. It can be important for sentencing
purposes.
2. The actus reus and mens rea of
secondary offences is different.
3. For strict liability cases mens rea
is still needed for secondary
offenders.
• The test to decide whether an
offender is a principal or secondary
offender is to discover whether
her/his/ act is the most immediate
cause of the actus reus or whether
s/he is merely helping the cause to
be affected.
7
Innocent Agents
8
Children and participation
• Can anyone give an example of an
innocent agent?
• Suppose that D send a bomb in the
post to V and Postman Pat delivers the
bomb – is s/he the principal offender
or an innocent agent?
• What would D be treated as in
Court?
Answer = Principal
Under s50 Children and Young
Persons Act 1933 (as amended) children
under 10 are considered to be doli
incapax
Under the Crime and Disorder Act
1998 children between 10 and 14 are
now held to be criminally liable for their
actions.
10
9
The Different Types of Secondary Offender
• As per the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861
secondary offenders are those who aid, abet,
counsel or procure the commission of a crime.
To aid – interpreted as ‘to give help,
support or assistance’. Think of an
example …
To abet – is to ‘encourage, incite or
instigate’. This is normally at or near
the scene of the crime (unlike counsel
which takes place before the crime).
11
Aid and abet case law
• Aid and abet implies some sort of action.
• In Bland [1988] the court decided that
merely living with a drug’s dealer and
perhaps having knowledge of his
activities was not enough to incur
liability. A more active involvement is
required
Compare this with Wilcox v Jeffrey
[1951] and Tuck v Robson [1970]
12
2
Summary of the issues
To counsel or procure
• An example of counselling can be seen in the
case of Calaem 1985. Likewise, AG’s
Reference No 1 of 1975 explains how procure
was held to mean ‘to produce by endeavour’.
Break into Law Firms and
undertake the Participation
Problem Scenario.
13
The actus reus of participation
• A passive presence at the scene would not, on
its own, be enough to constitute liability.
In Clarkson [1971] the conviction
of two soldiers for abetting a rape
was quashed because they had not
participated in any way.
15
The mens rea of secondary
offenders
• Two things need to be shown
1.
That the accomplice had
knowledge of the type of crime to
be committed.
2.
S/he intended to aid, abet,
counsel or procure the principal
offender
17
• A secondary offender can be charged with
all four types of secondary participation.
• i.e. Aiding, abetting, counselling and procuring.
• S/he can be found guilty if just one is
satisfied.
Normally, the accomplice will counsel
and procure before a crime is
committed and aid and abet during
the course of an offence.
14
Answer the below question …
• Question for Students: Can an accomplice
withdraw without incurring liability?
The Answer: Can be found in the
cases of Whitehouse [1941], Becerra
and Cooper [1975], Baker [1994] and
Mitchell & King [1999].
Students are asked to write up
these case notes and then give an
answer in written form to the above
question (to be marked in class).
16
Knowledge that a crime is to be
committed
• In Johnson v Youden and Others
[1950] it was stated that before D can
be convicted of aiding and abetting a
criminal offence ‘he must know at
least the essential matters which
constitute the offence’.
18
3
Recklessness or Negligence?
• The law seems to be undecided so far as D
being liable if s/he is merely reckless about
whether a crime is committed.
In Blakely, Sutton v DPP [1991] there was
a clear rejection of Caldwell recklessness
Likewise in Callow v Tillstone [1900]
liability due to negligence is not sufficient.
In class - students should produce notes
on these cases.
Intention to aid, abet, counsel or
procure …
• In addition to knowledge that a crime
will be committed, the prosecution must
also prove the accomplice intended to
do the acts that assisted or encouraged
the commission of the crime.
• See National Coal Board v Gamble
[1959].
19
Joint Enterprise …
Is motive relevant
• For the next class, students should précis
12.7.4 of Criminal Law by Diana Roe.(page
254) - producing case notes as necessary.
When completed - give the
notes to your Laws Tutor
who will briefly examine or
mark your notes.
20
21
Assistance after the crime
• Only assistance before or during a crime can
render a person liable as an accomplice.
However, you can commit a
crime if you help someone after
a crime has been committed
(think of some examples).
23
• In class and in writing, students should
undertake the Gillick contraception precis
exercise
22
Can a secondary offender be
convicted if the principal is acquitted?
• Yes, provided the actus reus has been
committed . In Bourne [1952] a man
forced his wife to have sexual
intercourse with a dog. She was not
charged with a criminal offence – but
her husband was convicted of aiding and
abetting an illegal act.
24
4
Different offences
Problem areas
• See also Cogan and Leak [1976] in which a
man was found guilty of procuring the rape of
his wife by a friend.
• A possible expansion of the law was seen in
Millward [1994]
Look at Millward [1994] and
the earlier case of Thornton v
Mitchell [1940] (see textbook) –
why the difference?
25
‘Review and Reform’ an important
exam element
• Students should plan the following essay (it is
in the homework schedule)…
• ‘The reform of the law relating to secondary
offenders is long overdue. Please explain and
discuss.’
• The liability of the secondary offender for a
different offence to that of the principal
offender is possible, provided both offences
share the same actus reus (Dunbar [1988]).
Example ... Murder and
Manslaughter
What happened in Tyrell [1894]
and why was the accomplice not
charged and convicted?
26
Activity and
Self-assessment
• In class, undertake the activity on page 256
and the self-assessment questions on page
259 of ‘Criminal Law’ by Diana Roe (3rd
edition).
Produce a collective essay
plan..
27
Important Participation Cases.
• Working in Law firms of three, produce
a written list of what you agree are the
six most important participation law
cases (including joint enterprise cases)
and explain why they are so important.
• For homework - update your notes on
those 6 cases from a ‘Criminal Law Cases
and Materials Book’ (give to your Law
Tutor within 7 days)..
29
28
For revision
• You must understand all the core
principles and know the case law
inside out.
• Copy the Key Facts table on page
257 of ‘Criminal Law’ (3rd edition).
• Reform will be an essential element –
so you MUST read up on reform of
this area.
30
5