Liability for Encouraging One's Own Murder, Victims, and Other Exempt Parties
Dennis J. Baker
King's College London – The Dickson Poon School of Law
(2012) 23(3) King’s Law Journal 257–285
This paper considers three major issues in the law of complicity: (1) the role of oblique intention in complicity; (2) complicity liability for those who engage in mutual gun- fights in public streets; and (3) the scope of the ‘exempt party’ rule. All of these issues arose in R v Gnango, but unfortunately the UK Supreme Court’s treatment of those issues was wholly unsatisfactory. Nonetheless, that decision provides us with a perfect backdrop for exploring these issues. I aim to demonstrate that the Lords got the law wrong. I will put forward an alternative interpretation of the law. I rely extensively on American law, but I am not aiming to carry out a full comparative study. Instead, the aim is to shed light on how the law might be reformed, interpreted and developed in the UK. The American case law is useful for highlighting some of the legal misconceptions drawn by the Lords in R v Gnango.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 29Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: January 9, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.890 seconds