Darkan v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJGUMMOW, KIRBY, HEYDON AND CRENNAN JJMatter No B87/2005HOWARD RODNEY DARKAN  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTMatter No B88/2005GWENDOLINE CECILY DEEMAL-HALL  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTMatter No B89/2005MARLOW PHILLIP ANDREW McIVOR  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTDarkan v The QueenDeemal-Hall v The QueenMcIvor v The Queen[2006] HCA 3422 June 2006B87/2005, B88/2005 & B89/2005ORDERIn each matter, the appeal is dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of QueenslandRepresentationA J Rafter SC for the appellant in B87/2005 (instructed by Legal Aid Queensland)P J Callaghan SC with A W Moynihan for the appellant in B88/2005 (instructed by Legal Aid Queensland)M J Byrne QC for the appellant in B89/2005 (instructed by Legal Aid Queensland)M J Copley for the respondent in all matters (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSDarkan v The QueenDeemal-Hall v The QueenMcIvor v The QueenCriminal Law – Common intention to prosecute unlawful purpose – Aiding the commission of an offence – Counselling the commission of an offence – Assault causing death – Appellants tried together and convicted of murder – Where Crown case relied on ss 7, 8 and 9 of the Criminal Code (Q) – Jury directed by trial judge that for the purpose of ss 8 and 9 of the Criminal Code (Q) "a probable consequence" was one which was "a real possibility or a substantial chance or a real chance" – Meaning of "a probable consequence" – Whether "probable" connotes something more than...