V Inchoate & Party Offences
A Attempts
Incomplete offences
1 Offences
(a) Specific attempt provisions
(i) Attempting to pervert the course of justice
1. s143
(ii) Attempted murder
2. s283
(iii) Assaults
3. in s222
(b) General attempt provisions
In the absence of a specific attempt provision, these general provisions make it an offence to attempt any offence in the criminal code.
(i) Attempting an indictable offence
4. s552
1. Any person who attempts to commit an indictable offence is guilty of a crime
1. The sentence is half of that of the principal offence, or 14 years where life is the sentence
(ii) Attempting a simple offence
5. s555A
1. Any person who attempts to commit a simple offence is guilty of a simple offence
1. The sentence is equal to that of the principal offence
2 Elements
Defined in s4
6. When a person, intending to commit an offence, begins to put his intention into execution by doing an act that is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence but does not fulfill his intention to such an extent as to commit the offence, he is said to attempt to commit the offence
(a) An intention to commit an offence
Must show that:
7. it was the person’s purpose to commit all the elements of the offence; or
8. the person must have known that all of the elements would be brought about
Intention must be shown, even if the principal offence does not require it
R v Leavitt (1984) 12 A Crim R 184
9. Fired a gun through a door, where police officers were
10. Foresight of possibility or likelihood are not enough alone to be sufficient
Cutter v R (1997) 84 A Crim R 152
11. Picked up by police, stabbed one in the neck when getting out of the van
12. Was held that he intended only to resist and wound, not to actually kill
1. When considering intent, all factors must be considered
1. especially the state of mind of the accused

(b) More than mere preparation
(i) Test in s4
13. This is the main test, others are persuasive
14. doing an act that is more than merely preparatory
(ii) Last Step Test
15. The accused must do everything within their power shout of actually committing the offence
1. R v Chellingworth [1954] QWN 35
1. Accused had splashed petrol all over a house, just needed to light it
2. however in this case, court decided last step was actually lighting it
2. This test is generally unreliable as an exclusionary rule, but useful as an inclusionary rule. (iii) Equivocality test
16. Requires that there is some conduct that can have been done for no other purpose other than for committing the offence
1. R v Williams [1965] Qd R 86
1. Accused grabbed victim, told her he would have her whether she liked it or not, and struck her as she struggled.
2. There was no innocent explanation for the conduct, so attempted rape
2. This test has also been criticized as not being a definitive test, but still useful
(iv) Proximity Test
17. The conduct of the accused is sufficiently close to the completed offence
1. R v Eagleton (1855) 169 ER 826
1. Under contract to supply bread, and was supplying underweight bread. Was caught before actually being paid under the contract.
2. Although he didn’t complete the offence as got no money, he had fulfilled all of his part, so sufficiently proximate to the offence.
(v) Substantial Step Test
18. The accused has made substantial progress towards the commission of the offence
1. DPP v Stonehouse [1978] AC 55
1. accused was a politician, insured his life with wife as beneficiary. He faked his own death, cashed in insurance and discovered alive.
2. Faking his own death was the substantial step, so attempted fraud
(c) Failure to fulfil the intention
(i) Voluntary desistence
19. s4
1. It does not matter if the offender stops, against his will or not, so long as the elements are still satisfied.
(ii) Impossibility
20. s4
1. It does not matter if the offender does not realise the offence is impossible
21. R v English (1993)