Inchoate Offences
Attn Gen Reference (No 1 of 1992) [1993]
In Jones [1990], the defendant was unable to accept that his ex-mistress had formed a serious relationship with another man, Michael Foreman. Jones purchased four guns and shortened the barrel of one of them. On the day of the crime, he drove to the school where Foreman was dropping off his child and jumped into the victim's car. He then pointed the loaded gun at Foreman and stated 'You are not going to like this'. The victim managed to grab the gun and throw it out of the window and then escaped himself, despite a cord pulling him back. The police later arrested the defendant who also had a knife with him. They recovered his holdall, which contained a hatchet, some ammunition and a length of cord and his car, in which they found a large quantity of English, French and Spanish money.
Jones claimed that he had only intended to kill himself and appealed against his subsequent conviction. He argued that he had at least three more acts to do before he could be said to be ready to kill anyone; i.e. he had to remove the safety catch on the gun, to put his finger on the trigger and thirdly, he had to pull that trigger.
The Court of Appeal agreed that the acts of obtaining the gun, shortening it, loading it, putting on a disguise and going to the school were merely preparatory to the commission of the offence. The judges added, however, that 'once he had got into the car, taken out the loaded gun and pointed it at the victim with the intention of killing him there was sufficient evidence for the consideration of the jury on the charge of attempted murder'. The appeal, therefore, was dismissed.
In Gullefer [1990], the defendant had placed a bet of £18 at a greyhound stadium in Romford. The dog was not performing well so, in the final stages of the race, the defendant climbed over the fence and onto the track and tried to distract the dogs. He hoped that this action would result in the race being declared null and void and in the eventual return of his stake money from the bookmaker. Unfortunately for Gullefer, he was no more successful in this plan than he was with his gambling and he was charged with attempted theft. His luck changed for the better, however, when his appeal was heard and his conviction was quashed. The former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Lane, decided that the attempt could not be said to begin until the defendant embarked upon 'the crime proper'. Gullefer's actions when he jumped onto the track, therefore, were merely acts in preparation for the later crime of theft and, at that time, he could not be said to be guilty of an attempt.
The case of Campbell [1991] and Geddes [1996] are rather more disquieting. In the first case, the defendant was arrested within yards of a post office, armed with an imitation gun and was convicted of attempted armed robbery. In the second case, Geddes had been discovered by a teacher in the boys' lavatory block at a school in Brighton. He had no authority to be there and left when challenged, discarding his rucksack as he went. This was found to contain a large kitchen knife, ropes and a roll of masking tape. He was later convicted of attempted false imprisonment.
Both convictions, however, were quashed on appeal on the finding that the acts were not more than merely preparatory. While the appeal court appeared to be convinced in both cases that the defendants had the necessary intention to commit the crimes in question, they nevertheless felt bound to conclude that the actions were not advanced enough to merit a conviction.
Attn Gen Reference (No 1 of 1992) [1993] ñ D can be found guilty of attempted rape, without the need to penetrate the womanís vagina, provided that there was enough other evidence of attack.