This is an Angel Ronan ™ exam question. The shoplifters took items from a Marshalls Department store and the items were left in a vehicle belonging to one of the accused. They were all involuntarily intoxicated at McDonald's where someone put LSD in their Cokes and Sprites the night before. The other accused (accused #2) was not found in possession of the stolen items. Can accused #2 be found guilty on this evidence? The Angel Ronan Lex Scripta ™ analysis says no. There is no evidence that she was in possession of the items personally. There may be video evidence of the Ronan theft in the store; however. If there is no video evidence then without an admission, there is no actual evidence of the actual crime being committed. Only the owner of the vehicle would be liable as they were found in possession of the items. Presumptively, the owner of the vehicle or registered driver is in possession of the items. Confirm if there is any defence to the charges for either or both individuals. What if there was a third person accused but they did not do anything except come along for the ride to the mall and there is no evidence of the third person doing anything; no video evidence except the first accused tried to involve them and said all the occupants were involved? The third accused insists they were just in the vehicle for the ride to Welwyn Garden City. If there is no other evidence, then the cc accused cannot be found guilty according the jurisprudence in Sklar v Borys. If its the competing testimony of the various accused, there is nothing but competing oaths and the evidence is insufficient to convict as it does not rise above a balance of probability.

  

This is an Angel Ronan ™ exam question.  

The shoplifters took items from a Marshalls Department store and the items were  left in a vehicle belonging to one of the accused.  They were all involuntarily intoxicated at McDonald's where someone put LSD in their Cokes and Sprites the night before.  The other accused (accused #2)  was not found in possession of the stolen items. Can accused #2 be found guilty on this evidence?  The Angel Ronan Lex Scripta ™ analysis says no. There is no evidence that she was in possession of the items personally.  There may be video evidence of the Ronan theft in the store; however.      If there is no video evidence then without an admission, there is no actual evidence of the actual crime being committed.  Only the owner of the vehicle would be liable as they were found in possession of the items.  Presumptively, the owner of the vehicle or registered driver is in possession of the items.   Confirm if there is any defence to the charges for either or both individuals.    What if there was a third person  accused but they did not do anything except come along for the ride to the mall and there is no evidence of the third person doing anything; no video evidence except the first accused tried to involve them and said all the occupants were involved?    The third accused insists they were just in the vehicle for the ride to Welwyn Garden City. If there is no other  evidence, then the cc accused cannot be found guilty according the jurisprudence in Sklar v Borys.  If its the competing testimony of the various accused,  there is nothing but competing oaths  and the evidence is insufficient to convict as  it does not rise above a balance of probability.