Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Criminal Conspiracy: Takes One to Tango?

Criminal Conspiracy: Takes One to Tango? AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (September 1982) 15 (129-130) EDITORIAL The recent decision of the High Court of Australia in R u Darby (1982) 40 ALR 594 raises questions of central significance for all concerned with the criminal justice system. In that case, Darby had been charged with one Thomas with conspiracy to commit armed robbery; there were no other persons alleged to have been party to the conspiracy. Both Darby and Thomas were tried together in the County Court of Victoria and convicted. Thomas appealed against his conviction to the Victorian Court of Criminal Appeal on the ground that, while there was a strong case that he conspired with Darby to commit a criminal act, the evidence did not establish what the completed crime was. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the appeal by Thomas and quashed his conviction. Darby then sought leave to appeal to the same court against his conviction on the ground that his conviction for conspiracy with Thomas could not stand since Thomas had been acquitted of that conspiracy. The Court of Criminal Appeal accepted the argument and quashed Darby's conviction. The Crown then sought leave to appeal. The High Court in a http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology SAGE

Criminal Conspiracy: Takes One to Tango?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/criminal-conspiracy-takes-one-to-tango-gFPFSlLGmB

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0004-8658
eISSN
1837-9273
DOI
10.1177/000486588201500301
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (September 1982) 15 (129-130) EDITORIAL The recent decision of the High Court of Australia in R u Darby (1982) 40 ALR 594 raises questions of central significance for all concerned with the criminal justice system. In that case, Darby had been charged with one Thomas with conspiracy to commit armed robbery; there were no other persons alleged to have been party to the conspiracy. Both Darby and Thomas were tried together in the County Court of Victoria and convicted. Thomas appealed against his conviction to the Victorian Court of Criminal Appeal on the ground that, while there was a strong case that he conspired with Darby to commit a criminal act, the evidence did not establish what the completed crime was. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the appeal by Thomas and quashed his conviction. Darby then sought leave to appeal to the same court against his conviction on the ground that his conviction for conspiracy with Thomas could not stand since Thomas had been acquitted of that conspiracy. The Court of Criminal Appeal accepted the argument and quashed Darby's conviction. The Crown then sought leave to appeal. The High Court in a

Journal

Australian & New Zealand Journal of CriminologySAGE

Published: Sep 1, 1982

There are no references for this article.