Joint Enterprise Murder
| Published date | 01 June 2016 |
| Date | 01 June 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0022018316646654 |
| Subject Matter | Comment |
Comment
Joint Enterprise Murder:
RvJogee
Simon Parsons
Formerly Associate Professor of Law, Southampton Solent University, Southampton, UK
Abstract
The law on joint enterprise murder has been harsh on secondary parties and in R v Jogee the
Supreme Court attempts to alleviate this harshness by reversing an incomplete and erroneous
reading of the previous case law. This comment considers whether this liberalisation of the law
in favour of secondary parties is more apparent than real.
Keywords
Joint enterprise, murder, recklessness, intention
Rv Jogee: The Facts
On 28 March 2012 two men, Jogee and Hirsi, were each convicted of the murder of a man called Fyfe.
Hirsi was the principal and Jogee the secondaryparty. On 10 June 2011 they were at the home of a woman
called Naomi Reid in Leicester. Both were intoxicated on drugs and alcohol. Hirsi entered the house,
shouting andFyfe came downstairs and therewas an angry exchange. Fyfe wentback upstairs to put on his
jeans. MeanwhileHirsi took a knife from thekitchen. Fyfe then came backdownstairs and tried to get Hirsi
and Jogee to leave.Fyfe was in hallway, confrontingHirsi who was armed with a knife. Jogee was outside,
striking a car with a bottleand shouting encouragement to Hirsi to do something to Fyfe. Jogee thencame
to the doorway, holding the bottle and he leaned pass Hirsi saying he wanted to smash the bottle over
Fyfe’s head but he was toofar away. Thus here was a joint enterprise or commonpurpose to cause at least
actual bodilyharm to Fyfe. Fyfe told them to leave but theyrefused. Miss Reid threatenedto call the police
whereuponHirsi pointed the knife at her chestand grabbed her by the throat.Reid retreated into the kitchen
and as she did so shesaw Hirsi make a stabbing motiontowards Fyfe’s chest and thenboth Hirsi and Jogee
ran off. Hirsi had stabbed Fyfe, who died of his wounds. Jogee’s appeal against conviction was dismissed
by the Court of Appeal and he further appealed to the Supreme Court. In RvJogee
1
the Supreme Court
held that his murder conviction should be quashed and either there should be a retrial or the court should
substitute a manslaughter conviction. The Supreme Court invited submissions on that question.
Corresponding author:
Simon Parsons, Formerly Associate Professor of Law, Southampton Solent University, Southampton, UK.
E-mail: simon.parsons7@hotmail.com
1. [2016] UKSC 8.
The Journal of Criminal Law
2016, Vol. 80(3) 173–176
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0022018316646654
clj.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial