(Ceylon) A link in purpose between an aider and abetter and the principal offender is required to establish the crime: ‘One man may abet another by helping to set the stage even before the victim has been found. If a man helps another in preparation for crimes of a certain nature with the intention that the other shall commit crimes of that nature he may abet those crimes when they come to be committed . . That being the circumstance I conclude that there is no logical reason why an evidentiary rule that is based upon common sense principles, that is that proof that a number of people have combined with the intention of helping another to commit a crime, is not available to be applied to cases which arise under the Code and to cases brought pursuant to s 11.2 of the Code. I do not see that the application of the rule in Tripodi[36] is inconsistent and incompatible with the terms of liability provided for under the Code or inconsistent with an indictment that accused persons have aided and abetted an offence.
Furthermore, I conclude that where there is, as in the present case, evidence which demonstrates that a number of persons have combined together with a common purpose to assist and/or facilitate the commission of an offence, then as a matter of both law and common sense, the planning activities related to the provision of such assistance and/or facilitation, including relevant acts and conversations, are admissible to prove such a combination, and the fact of a common intention. Furthermore in certain circumstances such evidence may be admissible to prove the extent of the participation of those persons in the commission of the crime.’
Citations:
[1965] UKPC 29, [1966] 2 WLR 81, [1965] 3 All ER 661, [1966] AC 37
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Crime
Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.445148