[quote:69d8a5ab45="Katcal"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui

There's an example of someone being tried for conspiracy to commit a crime without having taken part in the final act. There's a death penalty at stake in this case. Please note that I'm not defending the man at all, it's just the first example that sprang to mind.[/quote:69d8a5ab45]

That's not exactly the same as what I was describing. In this case it seems that the charge is more one of aiding/abetting the crime that did happen (i.e. september 11th)

[quote:69d8a5ab45]In seeking a death sentence, prosecutors must prove that he “intentionally participated in an act…and the victim died as a direct result of the act.” (This was proven when he admitted he knew about the attacks and did nothing to stop them.)[/quote:69d8a5ab45]

In my hypothetical situation, no crime had been commited. In this case, a crime has been commited and he is being charged with relation to the planning (or conspiracy) of that.

[quote:69d8a5ab45="Roman_K"]Marcia, I'm afraid that you've quite forgotten about conspiracy to commit a crime being a crime in itself. It may not apply to a lone person, but it certainly applies to two and more. Planning a bank heist, for example, *is* a crime in itself, if it's more than one person that does the planning. If said plan, said *conspiracy* can be proven, then it's a crime in itself, seperate from the actual robbery.

Of course, it's only applicable if said robbery was stopped before it even happened. After it does, it's a robbery, and not a conspiracy to commit one.[/quote:69d8a5ab45]

The pertinent part of your quote, Roman is: [i:69d8a5ab45]If said plan, said *conspiracy* can be proven...[/i:69d8a5ab45] But what would constitute proof? A napkin with a drawing of the bank's layout wouldn't be.

[quote:69d8a5ab45="drunkmonkey"]Yeah, I agree that everything then could be taken literally, but I suppose it could be judged on how serious their claim is. Like suppose, you have elaborte plans to steal the Queen's money, or you're actually holding secret missions to do so.[/quote:69d8a5ab45]

Possibly, if you caught someone with an full schematic of the bank, all the tools they would need to actually penetrate the bank, proof of meetings with other people about this, proof that someone has invested a lot of money in this operation, proof that they had been monitoring the bank to gather information. If a detective had all that, then they may be able to get a conviction. Maybe, if they're lucky. But they couldn't be certain.

The only way the detective could be sure it was a crime and be able to prove it, is if he waited (with a squad of men) for the conspirators to start commiting the crime, then arrest them as soon as they have done so. It would be the only way to get cast-iron proof that could stand up in court.

The proof is in the pudding. Especially if they planned to use explosive tiramisu to open the vault.