Publication:
The law of criminal complicity

dc.contributor.author Gillies, Peter en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2022-03-16T13:35:07Z
dc.date.available 2022-03-16T13:35:07Z
dc.date.issued 1981 en_US
dc.description.abstract This study deals with the law of criminal complicity in both its common law dimensions and as modified by legislation in England, in the Australian jurisdictions (i.e ., the Australian States and in the Commonwealth Crimes Act,19H), and in New Zealand. In the criminal law “complicity" denotes partnership in crime. As such, what might be called the doctrine of criminal complicity consists in that corpus of principle which governs the joint implication of each of two or more persons in a given crime. A person my become particeps criminis in one of two ways,i.e., by physically perpetrating this crime or by instigating, encouraging the perpetrator to do this. The first offender is usually called a principal in the crime , and the latter of them an accessory, or secondary party in its commission. For the reasons noted at the outset of Chapter One, the major stress in this study is upon the statement and evaluation of the law relating to criminal participation as an accessory. Nonetheless, it will of course be frequently necessary to consider the position of the principal in some detail in analysing the law of complicity. This analysis was motivated ay two ambitions, both of them traditional. The first of them was to state the law as it presently stands. This was felt to be justified, in particular, given that prior to this one (which was published in an earlier, and somewhat different form by the Law Book Co. Ltd. of Sydney, in July of last year), no monograph-length study had been undertaken of this topic in any of the common law jurisdictions. The seoond objective, one obviously dependent upon the fulfilment of the first, was to evaluate the effectiveness of this branch of the law and to determine whether or not it is in need of legislative reform in each of the subject jurisdictions, and if so, then in what terms. I have concluded, (1) that the law should continue to recognise a specifically derivative form of accessorial liability (derivative, in the sense that the person who instigates, encourages or assists the principal offender to commit a crime is made liable for this crime,rather than for an independent offence of an ancillary character); and (2) that the law of complicity - and in particular, that part of it dealing with accessorial liability - is susceptible to reform at a number of levels, in each of the subject jurisdictions. I have sought to take account of the law as it stood in the subject jurisdictions in the last months of 1980. en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1959.4/54148
dc.language English
dc.language.iso EN en_US
dc.publisher UNSW, Sydney en_US
dc.rights CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 en_US
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/au/ en_US
dc.source Thesis Digitisation Program en_US
dc.subject.other Criminal duplicity. en_US
dc.subject.other Common law. en_US
dc.subject.other Legislation. en_US
dc.subject.other England. en_US
dc.subject.other Australia jurisdiction. en_US
dc.subject.other Partnership in crime. en_US
dc.subject.other Participation. en_US
dc.subject.other Accessory. en_US
dc.title The law of criminal complicity en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US
dcterms.accessRights open access
dcterms.rightsHolder Gillies, Peter
dspace.entity.type Publication en_US
unsw.accessRights.uri https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
unsw.identifier.doi https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/4061
unsw.relation.faculty Law & Justice
unsw.relation.originalPublicationAffiliation Gillies, Peter, Law, Faculty of Law, UNSW en_US
unsw.relation.school School of Law *
unsw.thesis.degreetype PhD Doctorate en_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
GILLIES-004332598.pdf
Size:
33.11 MB
Format:
application/pdf
Description:
Resource type