I spoke briefly to the @CrimApLawAssoc conference to inspire us to keep battling on in relation to joint enterprise wrongful convictions.

The CPS need to give clear guidance on future prosecutions: See THE MEERKAT EXPLANATION below:

The Meerkat explanation:

Principal offenders commit the actus with the relevant mens rea (acts and fault elements)

Accessorial liability has always been based on:

1. Knowledge of essential matters.
2. Acts which demonstrate an intention to assist or encourage that crime or that type of crime.

See Pridmore, Johnson v Youden, Bainbridge and Maxwell v DPP of NI.

It had just not really been properly expressed until Cat Sjölin and I put the formulation together.

This was confined slightly by R. v. Jogee to:

1. Knowledge of essential facts.
2. Acts which demonstrate an intention to assist or encourage that crime.

This makes sense – focus on individual culpability after abolition of felony murder rule in 1967: (As the meerkat would say – simples).

Join CALA here http://www.cala.org.uk/