We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Does Complicity Require a Measurable Contribution?: R v Hussain and Others [2023] EWCA Crim 697.
- Authors
Krebs, Beatrice
- Abstract
Indeed, in I Hussain i , the court confirmed the position taken in I Rowe i that submissions to the effect that, although the accessory's encouragement of the principal need not have caused the offence, the accessory must nonetheless have had some effect on the events, are "unarguable" (at [82]). However, she argued that, without further guidance on the (level of) contribution made by the accessory's action towards the principal's commission of the offence, the jury would not have been able to distinguish between an accessory who was merely present and one who by his presence had assisted or encouraged. In [82], it cited [132-134] from I Rowe i [2022] EWCA Crim 27 (which in turn had relied on the decisions in I Calhaem i [1985] QB 808 and I Stringer i [2011] EWCA Crim 1396) which had held 'that the accessory's conduct must be "relevant" to the offence of the principal and, in that sense, there must be a "connecting link"'. However, his grounds of appeal raise an interesting question of law, namely what suffices for the I actus reus i of complicity to link an accessory to the principal offender's commission of the crime?.
- Subjects
DEFENDANTS; BURGLARY; JURORS; COMMON law; CRIMINAL convictions
- Publication
Journal of Criminal Law, 2023, Vol 87, Issue 4, p294
- ISSN
0022-0183
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1177/00220183231191471