Pretrial — dismissal of charges — assault — participating in an organised criminal group — shared objective — “planning, arrangement, or execution” — "execute" — Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 147 — Crimes Act 1961, ss 2 & 98A — R v Flyger [2001] 2 NZLR 721 — Parris v Attorney-General [2004] 1 NZLR 519 — Te Kahu v R [2012] NZCA 473 — R v Cara [2005] 1 NZLR 823 — Tamati v R [2013] NZCA 42 — R v Cooper [2017] NZHC 32757 — R v Moananui [2020] NZHC 3304. The fifteen defendants were members or associates of the Tribesmen gang. They faced charges arising from an assault outside the Christchurch District Court on five members of the Mongrel Mob. Each of the defendants applied to have charges of participating in an organised criminal group (POCG) dismissed. The Crown conceded that the attack happened spontaneously and was not planned. However the Crown submitted that the charge of POCG did not require that the offending be premeditated, as long as the defendants were part of an organised group. The Crown's argument was that the defendants had had a shared objective to attack the Mongrel Mob members, and therefore they had been an organised group. Examining the charge as laid out in s 98A of the Crimes Act, the Court observed that the simple fact of being members or associates of the same gang did not make the defendants an "organised criminal group." A degree of “planning, arrangement, or execution” of the offending was essential, even if only some of the group was involved in the “planning, arrangement, or execution”. In this case there was no evidence that any of the defendants had planned or arranged the offending; in fact, speed with which the incident unfolded suggested that they had not. Without planning or arrangement, there could be no "execution". The possibility of long-standing tensions between the rival gangs was not enough to establish a common intention to commit violence whenever they encountered one another. The Court found that a properly-directed jury would not be able to convict the defendants on the POCG charge, and accordingly dismissed the charge against each of the defendants. Judgment Date: 4 May 2022.