R v Gamble
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1989 |
| Date | 01 January 1989 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
- Accessories - Common purpose - Punishment beating - Victim killed - Whether accused contemplated grievous bodily harm - Whether death a direct consequence of the particular grievous bodily harm contemplated. Evidence - Statements containing inculpatory and exculpatory parts - Inference to be drawn from failure to testify - Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order, 1988 (S.I. No.1987, N.I. 20), art. 20.
Four men were charged with murder following the death of a member of the Ulster Volunteer Force in a punishment shooting. One accused pleaded guilty and a second was found guilty. The judge held that it was established on the evidence that the other two accused, Douglas and McKee, when they entered upon the joint venture, contemplated that violence amounting to grievous bodily harm would be inflicted on the victim, of the nature of beating or "kneecapping" (discharging a firearm into one of his limbs). They did not, however, know or contemplate that he would be killed. Held, finding Douglas and McKee guilty of wounding with intent to commit grievous bodily harm, but not guilty of murder, that, 1, where a person acted with another in pursuance of a common purpose, the accessory was liable so long as the principal acted within the ambit of the type of offence contemplated by him. 2. The nature of the act contemplated and that which was in fact committed had to be considered. The subjective state of mind of the accused was relevant and, while the principle was established that an intention to inflict grievous bodily harm qualified as the mens rea of murder, it should...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
DPP v Kelly
...directed by s. 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1964, has remained on intention rather than forseeability. 47 In the case of R. v. Gamble [1989] NI 268, the Northern Ireland courts dealt with a case, the facts of which were very similar to the facts of the present case. So similar indeed that ......
- Taitt v R, Gooding v R
-
Edmonds v R
...of the view that the appellant's liability for manslaughter did not depend on his having knowledge of the actual weapon used. Referring to R v Hartley 6 (a s 66(1) case), the Court made the point that s 66(2) may be utilised in the situation of a group attack where the members of the group ......
-
R v Jogee
... ... a different rule applies to cases of parasitic accessory liability, the mental element in assisting or encouraging is an intention to assist or encourage the commission of the crime and this requires knowledge of any existing facts necessary for it to be criminal: National Coal Board v Gamble [1959] 1 QB 11 , applied for example in Attorney General v Able [1984] QB 795 , Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] AC 112 and Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland v Maxwell [1978] 1 WLR 1350 per Lord Lowry at 1374G-1375E, approved in the House ... ...
-
Overwhelming Supervening Acts, Fundamental Differences, and Back Again?
...manslaughter, OSA ‘is a principle of causation, akin to the concept of a novus actus inter-veniens’. See also the discussion of Gamble [1989] NI 268 by Lord Rodger in Rahman [2008] UKHL 45, [2009] 1 AC 129 at[40]: the facts ‘lent themselves to a possible conclusion, which Carswell J in fact......
-
Overwhelming Supervening Acts, Fundamental Differences, and Back Again?
...manslaughter, OSA ‘is a principle of causation, akin to the concept of a novus actus inter-veniens’. See also the discussion of Gamble [1989] NI 268 by Lord Rodger in Rahman [2008] UKHL 45, [2009] 1 AC 129 at[40]: the facts ‘lent themselves to a possible conclusion, which Carswell J in fact......
-
Prosecuting Complicity
...V only, wouldresult in the accessory’s (conditional) intentional encouragement being annulled by the breach of thecondition.58. RvGamble [1989] NI 268. See also RvMichaud [2000] 144 CCC (3d) 62. See also the penetrating discussion in above n. 11at 17.59. [1989] NI 268.60. RvAnderson [1966] ......
-
Lesser Included Offences, Alternative Offences and Accessorial Liability
...itself as a cause of its result.’ G.H. von Wright, Explanation and Understanding (Routledge: Oxford,2011) 67–68. 6. Cf. R v Gamble [1989] N.I. 268. On when intending the actus reus of a constructive crime is and is not sufficient, see Brown State (1887) 11 NE 447 (1887); Thomas v Commonweal......