Product Code Database
Aiding and abetting is a legal doctrine related to the guilt of someone who aids or (encourages, incites) another person in the commission of a crime (or in another's suicide). It exists in a number of different countries and generally allows a court to pronounce someone guilty for aiding and abetting in a crime even if he or she is not the principal offender. English common law distinguished aiding and abetting from being an accessory before the fact in that the former required presence at the crime, while the latter required absence from the crime. Some jurisdictions maintain that distinction. Accessory & Conspiracy Other jurisdictions have merged being an accessory before the fact with aiding and abetting. Accessory Before the Fact – What Does This Mean?
To show that an accused aided or abetted in the commission of a crime, the Crown does not need to prove the guilt of a specific principal offender.
The Crown must show something more than mere presence to prove the act of aiding or abetting. Presence in the commission of a crime might be evidence of aiding and abetting if the accused had prior knowledge of the crime, or if the accused had legal duty or control over the principal offender. For example, the owner of a car who lets another person drive dangerously without taking steps to prevent it may be guilty because of their control over the driver's use of the vehicle. R. v. Kulbacki, 1966 1 CCC 167 (Man CA)
Further, the Crown must show that the accused had prior knowledge that "an offence of the type committed was planned", but it is not necessary that the accused desired the result or had the motive of assisting the crime. Intention to assist the crime is sufficient. R. v. Hibbert, 1995 2 SCR 973
It is derived from the United States Code (U.S.C.), section two of title 18:
The scope of this federal statute for aiders and abettors "is incredibly broad—it can be implied in every charge for a federal substantive offense". The term "principal" refers to any actor who is primarily responsible for a criminal offense.
For a successful prosecution, the provision of "aiding and abetting" must be considered alongside the crime itself, although a defendant can be found guilty of aiding and abetting an offense even if the principal is found not guilty of the crime itself. In all cases of aiding and abetting, it must be shown a crime has been committed, but not necessarily who committed it. It is necessary to show that the defendant has willfully associated himself with the crime being committed, that he does, through his own act or omission, as he would do if he wished for a criminal venture to succeed.American Bar Association Antitrust Section (1982). 9780897070546, American Bar Association. . ISBN 9780897070546 Under this statute, anyone who aids or abets a crime may be charged directly with the crime, as if the charged had carried out the act himself. Quotation: "Any one who assists in the commission of a crime may be charged directly with the commission of the crime". This is distinct from the concept of being an accessory after the fact, a charge distinct from being a principal.
In 1948, § 550 became 18 U.S.C. § 2(a). Section 2(b) was also added to make clear the legislative intent to punish as a principal not only one who directly commits an offense and one who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. It removes all doubt that one who puts in motion or assists in the illegal enterprise or causes the commission of an indispensable element of the offense by an innocent agent or instrumentality is guilty as a principal even though he intentionally refrained from the direct act constituting the completed offense.US Justice Department (1998), citing United States v. Dodd, 43 F.3d 759, 763 (1st Cir. 1995).
Subsection (a) of Section 2 was amended to its current form in 1951 to read, "Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal." Subsection (b) was also amended in 1951 to add "wilfully" and "is punishable as a principal".US Justice Department (1998)
(Section 10 states that the Act does not apply to Scotland.)
Section 44(1) of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 makes similar provision for summary offences. It says:
In the case of R v Jogee,2016 UKSC 8 the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom held in 2016 that an accessory can be guilty of the principal's crime only if the accessory intended to assist the principal to commit the crime while having the necessary mens rea to commit that crime.
|
|
