R v Hawke

(2016) 259 A Crim R 114; [2016] QCA 144

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Verdict unreasonable or insupportable having regard to evidence
4. › Accomplice evidence
5. › Whether reasonably open to jury to accept and act upon co-offender's evidence
6. › Whether acquittal of co-accused necessarily reflected doubt about evidence against appellant
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Particular grounds of appeal
4. › Misdirection and non-direction
5. › Directions on party liability
6. › Counselling or procuring under s 7(1)(d)
7. › Whether directions required express reference to intention and knowledge
8. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 7(1)(d)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal and new trial
3. › Particular grounds of appeal
4. › Misdirection and non-direction
5. › Directions on common purpose
6. › Whether necessary to repeat 'in conjunction with one another' on each occasion
7. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 8
1. Criminal Law
2. › Parties to offences
3. › Counselling or procuring
4. › Mens rea requirements
5. › Intentional participation with knowledge of essential elements
6. › Recklessness insufficient
7. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 7(1)(d)

Quick Take

Directions on s 7(1)(d) of the Criminal Code (Qld) need not expressly use the words 'intend' or 'know' where the trial judge directs the jury that the prosecution must prove the accused 'counselled in the sense of urging or advising' the principal to commit the specific offence, and the principal committed the offence after and when carrying out that counsel. The ordinary meaning of 'counselled' implicitly conveys the requirements of intentional participation and knowledge of the essential elements of the offence. Directions on s 8 need not repeat the words 'in conjunction with one another' on every occasion where the requirement is conveyed at the outset and the context makes clear that the common purpose involved acting together.