Dunlop and Sylvester v. The Queen
Encyclopedia
Dunlop and Sylvester v. The Queen, [1979] 2 S.C.R. 881 is the leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada
of the criminal offence of aiding and abetting
. The Court held that for a conviction for aiding and abetting the mere presence of the accused is not enough, there must be something more.
The girl testified at trial that the two teens had participated in the rape. The trial judge directed the jury to find whether the teens had participated enough to have aided or abetted the rape under section 21(1) of the Criminal Code
or had a common intention to rape the victim under section 21(2) of the Criminal Code.
Accordingly, the two teens were acquitted.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
of the criminal offence of aiding and abetting
Aiding and abetting
Criminal=Aiding and abetting is an additional provision in United States criminal law, for situations where it cannot be shown the party personally carried out the criminal offense, but where another person may have carried out the illegal act as an agent of the charged, working together with or...
. The Court held that for a conviction for aiding and abetting the mere presence of the accused is not enough, there must be something more.
Background
Two teenagers, Dunlop and Sylvester, were members of a motorcycle club. One evening they went to a party held by the club where other members were involved in a gang rape of a teenage girl.The girl testified at trial that the two teens had participated in the rape. The trial judge directed the jury to find whether the teens had participated enough to have aided or abetted the rape under section 21(1) of the Criminal Code
Criminal Code of Canada
The Criminal Code or Code criminel is a law that codifies most criminal offences and procedures in Canada. Its official long title is "An Act respecting the criminal law"...
or had a common intention to rape the victim under section 21(2) of the Criminal Code.
Opinion of the Court
Justice Dickson wrote the decision for the majority. He held that the trial judge had erred in instructing the jury to consider the "common intention" provision of the criminal code. The sole issue was whether the teens had aided and abetted the commission of the crime. In considering the provision he held that:- In the case at bar I have great difficulty in finding any evidence of anything more than mere presence and passive acquiescence. Presence at the commission of an offence can be evidence of aiding and abetting if accompanied by other factors, such as prior knowledge of the principal offender's intention to commit the offence or attendance for the purpose of encouragement. There was no evidence that while the crime was being committed either of the accused rendered aid, assistance or encouragement to the rape of Brenda Ross. There was no evidence of any positive act or omission to facilitate the unlawful purpose.
Accordingly, the two teens were acquitted.