.png){kind=icon}
Chapter 10 Interactive key cases
Participation
The Court of Appeal dismissed A’s appeal against conviction for being an accessory. It is not enough to show that A knows that some illegal venture is intended; however, where A knows that a crime of the type in question was intended and does an act intending to assist a crime of the type later committed, A may be convicted as an accessory to the crime.
If A did not foresee that P might commit an act which was fundamentally different from that which they jointly contemplated, he could not be guilty of murder or manslaughter unless the weapon used was just as dangerous as that which was contemplated.
The Supreme Court held that the current law—where the mens rea of an accomplice only required that he or she foresaw the principal might kill—was incorrect. It had to be shown that the accomplice intended to assist or encourage the principal in the commission of the offence, with any mens rea required for the full offence.
Where A contemplates that P might kill with intent to do so or to cause really serious injury, A may be convicted as a secondary party to the murder, even though this means imposing a lower level of mens rea in relation to A than would have to be proved in relation to P.
Where A realizes that P might kill or intentionally inflict serious injury, but nevertheless continues to participate in the venture, that amounts to a sufficient mental element for A to be guilty of murder.
Printed from , all rights reserved. © Oxford University Press, 2024