Should legislation on Joint Enterprise be altered within the British legal system?
What is Joint Enterprise?
Joint Enterprise is a common law based on judicial precedence that enables two or more people to be charged and convicted of the same crime regardless of whether they are truly guilty of performing it. The Joint Enterprise law is over 300 years old and facilitates for two groups of people to fall under its sentencing; principles and secondary parties. The principle is the main perpetrator of the crime committed, usually planning the offence and being at the forefront of when the felony is being carried out. The secondary party can be more than one person who aids and abets in the crime however they may or may not be at the crime scene
…show more content…
Both individuals take part in breaking into the building and taking the goods therefore acting as joint principles in the crime.
2) The second type is where a second party aids and/or abets, encouraging the principle to commit a single crime.
Example: The principle plans to commit a robbery and asks a second party to assist them in the crime by driving them to the crime scene. Here the second party is aware of what the principle is about to do and aids them in doing so however they themselves do not participate in the robbery. Due to them aiding and abetting, under Joint Enterprise the second party is guilty of the same crime as the principle.
3) The last type is where the principle and second party/parties participate together in one crime (crime A) and in the course of it the principle commits a second crime (crime B) which the second party/parties had foreseen that they might commit.
Example: The principle and secondary party are in the midst of committing a robbery (crime A) however during this, the principle commits a second crime of murdering a victim (crime B). The secondary party do not necessarily want to or intend to commit this second crime however they foresaw that it may happen as they knew the principle was armed with a weapon and this gives reason to them being guilty of murder (the same as the principle) despite them not committing this second
…show more content…
This contrast to normal criminal law which generally only holds offenders liable for their own actions but under the common law of Joint Enterprise, a person may be found guilty for another person’s crime. This therefore means that the sentencing can be seen as unjust and can cause issues such as someone serving a longer prison sentence than they should. This dispute is particularly raised in the third type of Joint Enterprise where the principle commits a second criminal act, while participating in the first criminal act. The law states that because the secondary party was involved in crime A and anticipated crime B, they are also convicted under the same sentencing as the principle regardless of them not participating in the second crime. This creates many arguments in court as the question of whether the second party should receive the same sentence as the principle if they themselves did not perform
Partnership – “A legal entity formed by two or more co-owners to operate a business for profit.” (Longenecker, Petty, Palich, Hoy, Pg. 202) In a partnership, the advantage for the owners is the capability to reduce the workload and the financial burden, especially if each partner has management skills that enhances the business. The disadvantages of a partnership such as personal conflicts and leadership expectations, therefore this organizational form should only be chosen once all other options have been considered.
In conclusion, Fletcher’s paradigm provides another way to look at liability. In this paradigm, he is more concerned with the case itself than if it brings social utility. Fletcher also looks at the actions and risks that both parties pose on one another and uses this to determine liability.
against person. Joe is the Principle in the first degree in this crime, because he is the perpetrator of the
Civil law administers associations among individuals and a party who is wounded economically or physically by another individual or group can claim a charge in opposition to that unit. Conversely, criminal laws function below the conjecture that the society rather than a person, has been wronged by the defendant’s proce...
There are many different meanings of crime and many different reasons people commit crimes. In the United States, defense lawyers try to prove their clients did not know what they were doing when they committed the crime and the prosecution tries to prove the defendant did know what they were doing when they committed the crime. However, the prosecution must have the elements of a crime, which means state of facts to prove someone guilty. The prosecution lawyers and the defense lawyers use elements of a crime for the defendant. The following are examples of elements of a crime: mens rea, autus reus, concurrence of actus renus and mens rea. All of these can be used as elements of a crime.
Upon further examination of the perpetrator of the crime and his/her criminal intent and their specific positive or negative emotions that may have influenced the actions through social or peer judgments. It is imperative that a complete and unbiased “studies on the law-emotional interface” (2011. Pg. 3) will help determine which of the two intervening acts to determine the chain of causation
against the party by committing a variety of crimes. The crimes range from keeping a secret
The law of conspiracy is considerably more complex and uncertain than it need be because the statutory reform of the area largely contained in Part I of the criminal law Act 1977 was only partial. As a result, there are now two types of conspiracy – statutory conspiracies governed by the 1977 Act, and an important but limited range of common law conspiracies, which were expressly retained by the act, still governed by the old common law rules, (Tomlins & King, 1992). The most recent of the conspiracies is the conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to corrupt public morals and the conspiracy to outrage public decency; statutory conspiracy entails any agreement to commit a crime
the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the
With the rapid increase in crime rates, the defendants must act recklessly or intentionally to be held guilty. Crimes can be classified into two types of intents; general, and specific intent.
certain acts and persons become fitted with the label `criminal’ i.e. the process of crime interpretation by the courts
For a crime to be registered and recorded in the system, a three step process must take place. Firstly, a person must know that a crime has been committed. This means that any given individual who commits a crime must be aware, or must have been witnessed by a member of the community while committing the crime (Coleman, & Moynihan, 1996) Secondly,the appropriate authorities must be informed either by the person who committed it or an individual who has observed the crime being committed. Although it ishighly unlikely that the offender will report the crime that he/she has committed. And finally, the authorities that have been reported to must also acknowledge and agree that a criminal offense has taken place and has a law has been broken in the act.If one of the three is not followed up, then the crime goes unrecognized. However, if other individuals of ...
...t for illegally profit, the consequences will be unfavorable; therefore, a decision has to be made in order to protect the rights of the original owner and the responsible party must be held responsible for any infractions.
“…separate legal entity possessed of separate legal rights and liabilities so that the rights of one company in a group cannot be exercised by another company in that group …”
punishment to be done to whoever did the crime. If the criminal doesn't get the kind of