The fact that the appellant had absented himself on the day the murder was carried out by the defendant who did the killing did not amount to an unequivocal communication of the appellant’s withdrawal from the scheme contemplated at the time he gave his assistance. The offence of counselling and procuring can be committed by the giving of assistance before the full offence. As in the case of joint enterprise where both parties are present at the scene of the crime, it is not necessary for the prosecution to show that a secondary party who lends assistance or encouragement before the commission of the crime intended the victim to be killed, or to suffer serious injury, provided it was proved that he foresaw the event as a real or substantial risk and nonetheless lent his assistance.
Citations:
Gazette 21-Apr-1993, [1993] EWCA Crim 3, [1997] Cr App R 327, [1993] 2 All ER 955, [1993] Crim LR 698
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Bryce CACD 18-May-2004
The defendant said that his involvement in the murder of which he had been convicted had been secondary only. He was alleged to have transported the killer and the gun which he used to commit the murder to a caravan near the victim’s home so that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87647