Question 2

Tim managed a business for Mary in the country of Pacifika. Following a dispute between them, Tim resigned and accepted a new position overseas in the Rainy Islands. He decided to take some goods from the business with him as recompense for his efforts on behalf of the business. He told his friend Terry what he planned to do. Terry volunteered the use of his truck and helped Tim load the goods. Unfortunately, Mary's son, Pete, arrived when Tim and Terry had finished loading the loading the goods and were about to drive away. Tim, Pete attempted to stop them but Tim got out of the truck, knocked Pete down and administered a few kicks. When he got back in the truck, Terry told him, 'You shouldn't have attacked him; that was wrong.' However, Terry then drove the truck away.

Just before Tim was about to leave for the Rainy Islands, following a complaint made to police by Mary, he received a summons charging him with robbery. Tim ignored the summons and left the country to take up his new position. A warrant for his arrest was issued but no attempt was made to bring him back, even though there was an extradition treaty in place with the Rainy Islands.

No further proceedings were taken in the matter for five years. Then, another son of Mary's, Dan, arrived in the Rainy Islands as the newly appointed Police Commissioner. Dan arranged with the local authorities for Tim to be deported to Pacifika to face the charge of robbery. The deportation was in breach of the law of the Rainy Islands which should have given Tim a right to a hearing before he was expelled. The Pacifika authorities assisted with travel documents knowing that the deportation was unlawful. Tim was duly expelled, arrested on arrival in Pacifika and tried on the robbery charge.

1. Can Tim obtain a stay of proceedings on the ground that the prosecution is an abuse of process?
2. Suppose that Tim was convicted. Several months later, Tim has found a new lawyer who believes that the prosecution was an abuse of process. Can an appeal be brought despite this argument never having been made at the trial and despite the passage of several months since the trial finished?
3. If Tim committed robbery, would Terry be liable for the same offence?

Question 3

Fredo went into a supermarket with a bush-knife in his hand. He then began chopping wildly at customers. Several of them were severely injured. Fortunately no one was killed.

Two police officers arrived and subdued Fredo by knocking him down, handcuffing his arms behind his back, dragging him out to a waiting police car and throwing him into the back of it. In the process, Fredo suffered a broken arm, various cuts and bruises, and the loss of a tooth.

At the police station, the officers questioned Fredo. They found it difficult to make him comprehend their questions and also to understand his answers. However, Fredo agreed with their suggestion that he had intended to kill the customers. It eventually became clear that Fredo was claiming to be a superhero, 'Surfrider', and that he had gone into the supermarket to expel alien invaders. He had attacked them in order to save the world.

Investigations established that Fredo had a history of mental disorder and violent behavior while deluded. He had several times been hospitalized because of this. Subsequent to the incident in the supermarket, he received medical treatment and will be able to stand trial for his actions. Fredo has been charged with the attempted murder (in Vanuatu, attempted intentional homicide) of the customers who were injured.

1. What will the prosecution need to prove about Fredo's state of mind in order to obtain a conviction?
2. Will Fredo's statement that he intended to kill the customers be admissible to prove his state of mind?
3. Does Fredo have a defence to the charges?
4. Was the manner of Fredo's arrest lawful?