Conspiracy

Question 0

Barnard

Answer 0

A “lesser” purpose may be included in the larger one if the offences are of the same type but the reverse is not true.

Question 1

Griffiths

Answer 1

Each conspirator must share the common unlawful purpose or design.

Question 2

Broad

Answer 2

Differences in the content of the agreement are irrelevant insofar as each party contemplates a course of conduct leading to the commission of the same offence.

Question 3

Walker

Answer 3

If agreement is conditional there is no conspiracy.

Question 4

O’Hadhmaill (2 precedents)

Answer 4

If the commission of the crime is conditional it is a conspiracy.

There should be as many separate courses of conduct as crimes the parties unequivocally agree to commit.

Question 5

Bolton

Answer 5

“Course of conduct” is to be given a broad interpretation embracing acts/omissions and consequences

Question 6

Edwards/Saik

Answer 6

Intent to carry out the course of conduct amounting to a crime is part of the mens rea for conspiracy.

Question 7

Cooke

Answer 7

Oblique intent that the course of conduct amounting to the commission of a crime will be carried out is sufficient for statutory conspiracy.

Question 8

Saik (2 precedents)

Answer 8

1. The mens rea of statutory conspiracy is intent to agree, intent to do the act prohibited by the substantive offence and intent/knowledge as to the essential elements of the offence.
2. If the element is not essential, the mens rea requirement as to that element is the same as for the substantive offence.

Question 9

Roberts

Answer 9

For multi-offence conspiracies it must be shown that each conspirator agreed to the most serious of the offences for them to be charged with a single conspiracy.

Question 10

Siracusa

Answer 10

The requirement in Anderson that D must intend to play some part in carrying out the course of conduct amounting to a crime is satisfied if D merely fails to prevent the commission of the offence.