Conspiracy to commit burglary

[SixLeggedSugarBug]

If someone was charged with conspiracy to commit burglary does that mean that the burglary never took place, they were just planning it but never saw it through for whatever reason, or could the burglary have happened and the conspiracy part is because there were three of them?

The person in question appeared in magistrates court with two other people (the people they were conspiring with) and the case was adjourned to Crown court so presumably serious.

I am not a lawyer but I think it could mean they were involved in the planning but didnt necessarily do the burgling

Could be either

Conspiracy means a group plan. So the crime doesn't need to have taken place, but the plan has to have been real and determined. E.g. if they were caught smashing into a premises and arrested.

Could it be as simple as drunk texts saying oh we should burgle that rich pensioner or would it have to be more concrete than that?

More than that.

When I was young I had a friend convicted for conspiracy to commit criminal damage (graffiti). In that case the crimes had taken place. The conspiracy charge was used I believe because the sum of the incidences added up more to the original ones singularly and was a way of bringing them into one charge/ charging on a high cumulative threshold.

In my experience the conspiracy case was not a small one. There was extensive work and evidence behind it- showing travel movements, phone records, photographs, cctv.

I would suspect it is most likely there were a pattern of offences over a period of time and the expectation they would continue.

It’s all very confusing to me, I originally assumed that conspiracy meant they were caught planning it but it seems like perhaps the burglary happened but they don’t know which of the three did it so they are all charged with conspiracy?

Either or https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/45/part/I

It would not just be drunks texts, the burglary may or may not have happened but all the defendants would have made serious preparation to do the act.

If its been referred up to Crown Court that is usually because they think there may need to be a sentence over 12 years doesn't it? I would imagine for a conspiracy burglary case to be in the higher court there must have been a group of offences, likely a great number of them, of high value and potentially with aggravating factors like threats of violence. Crown Court means it has to have been concerning. If this is someone you know I wouldn't try and convince yourself these were some drunk texts. I think you can request sight of court records but it's not something I've tried to do myself.

I am not sure but I don’t think Crown court has to be over 12 years, I think magistrates can only give out a sentence of 6 months in Prision and the person said they were looking at 3 years but I don’t know if that is true because they didn’t tell me the real offense either so it could all be lies.

I think you've posted about this before?
It sounds familiar.

I think he's lying to you.

I haven’t posted before, the person in question is a female relative. Told me last year they had been arrested supposedly on drugs charges, knew they were in court today but it was in the news paper that the actual offence is “Conspiracy to commit a burglary dwelling with intent to steal”

Conspiracy is formed when two or more agree on a course of conduct. They don’t have to see it through and they don’t have to play the same role. There needs to be evidence of the agreement which might be explicit or implied.

Conspiracy offences are indictable only and therefore have to go to Crown Court.

More than 12 months not years!!!