Arson — house fire — beyond reasonable doubt — acting intentionally or recklessly — R v Duncan [2008] NZCA 365. The young person was charged, jointly with an associate, for recklessly setting fire to a residential property. The sole evidence against the young person was a police interview from the same day as the alleged offending. In order to find the charge of arson proved, a court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt as to the intent of the person. Counsel for the Crown cited a case where party liability was at issue. The Judge here noted that the young person was not being charged as a party to the arson, and that this required something more than simply being present in any case. It required active encouragement. Based on the interview, it was not evident that the young person intended to give encouragement to his associate, who had clearly established intent, or that the young person was acting jointly with him. The Judge found the charge not proven. Judgment Date: 20 July 2020. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *