1. Vince Villain and Neville Nogood are drug addicts and housemates. When their need to use drugs becomes pressing (which is a very common event) one or other of them will commit a theft of some sort in order to restore their lifestyle. 2. On 1 June 2015, they were arrested at their home for possession of drugs (heroin). They had never been arrested before, and so when the police obtained their fingerprints and compared them with those found at the scenes of unsolved cases, police discovered that fingerprints that had been found at those various crime scenes matched one or other or both of them. They were consequently arrested for those offences as well. All those offences occurred in the suburb in which Vince and Neville lived. 3. The table below shows the offences and who was alleged to be involved in chronological order. It does not matter for present purposes what the detail of the evidence was against Vince and Neville in each individual case beyond the presence of fingerprints, except that in those cases where they were both involved, the evidence indicates that they were parties with each other. Incident Date Vince? Neville? Offence 1 10/12/2012 Yes Burglary 2 2/12/2014 Yes Yes Burglary 3 4/12/2014 Yes B/E premises & steal 4 5/12/2014 Yes Stealing 5 7/12/2014 Yes Yes B/E premises & steal 6 7/12/2014 Yes Stealing 7 9/12/2014 Yes Burglary 4. You are a Crown Prosecutor. A junior legal officer comes to you and asks you to sign a single indictment that the officer has drafted that contains all the above offences alleged against both offenders. You ask the officer if there is any indication that the accused will plead guilty? The officer says no, and indicates that the clear indication from the defence is that both will contest the charges. The officer tells you that all necessary decisions have been taken to have the matters proceed upon indictment rather than in the Magistrates Court. 5. Wearily shaking your head, you set about the task of helping the junior legal officer (who has assumed that these are all joinable in one indictment) redraft the indictment. Question 1 Fully analyse the issue of joinder of all charges above in the junior legal officer's draft indictment. Be sure to explain to the junior legal officer the rules, provisions, and/or principles relevant answering that question and how they apply to the facts. Don't just give a conclusion; explain your analysis to the junior officer. Question 2 What options are open to you to draft the indictment or indictments in ways that comply with the joinder rules? (i.e. which charges can be joined and which cannot). Fully explain