Conspiracy question Forum

[eastwardway]

X approaches Z and X tells Z that X is going to burglarize a local politician's home. Z works for the local newspaper and Z responds to X that Z will watch X's entry and write about it in the local paper.

Without getting into the constitutional issues, at a basic level is this a conspiracy? Would Z and X have a conspiracy for X to burglarize the local politician's home? Or would Z only be an accomplice?

[encore1101]

Just from the facts here, my first reaction is no, its not a conspiracy. Most conspiracies involve some sort of element that "engages in or cause the performance of such act" element. In this case, Z knows about it, but merely being a witness to a crime does not make one a conspirator. Additionally, failing to report a crime that may or may not be perpetuated does not make one a conspirator.

edit: Z may be liable for a civil conspiracy claim if the crime was carried out, but without some overt act, not criminal conspiracy.

It'd be different if X had told Z "If you report it in the paper tomorrow, I'll rob the politician's house tonight." or Z said he'll watch X rob the house and be a lookout man, but those facts are not present here.

[Codicil]

No, this is not a conspiracy. Under common law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people with the intent to accomplish the same criminal purpose.

Also, Z would not be an accomplice. An accomplice:

• (1) with the intent that the crime be committed,
  (2)(a) aids, counsels, or encourages, or
  (2)(b) fails to act where he has a legal duty.

At common law, an accomplice must intend to aid, counsel, or encourage another to commit the crime.

[arklaw13]

Accomplice - Z would have to act in a way that provides actual aid or encouragement under CL. P would argue that X wants attention and is more likely to commit the burglary if he knows he will get famous. Z would argue that reporting the crime in the paper makes it more likely that X will get caught, so actually hinders the crime. Doubt he's accomplice, but decent arguments either way.

Conspiracy - need an agreement to commit a crime and action in furtherance of the conspiracy. You didn't say that they acted on the conspiracy at all. Assuming that element, still not sure if Z agreed to commit a crime. Z just agreed to show up and write about it. For Mens Rea, Z would need to want X to commit the burglary. P would argue that he wanted him to because he wanted a story out of it. Better case here, but would need more facts.