<![CDATA[Proving intent in theft cases involving multiple participants requires a clear distinction between an individual’s contribution and the mental element necessary for criminal liability. This study examines the legal requirements for establishing intent, distinguishing joint perpetration from intentional assistance, and safeguarding individualized responsibility, with Jambi City as the contextual focus. The research adopts a normative legal design using statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary and secondary legal materials are examined through grammatical and systematic interpretation and qualitative legal argumentation. The analysis indicates that the occurrence of theft and an individual’s association with other accused persons do not independently establish intentional participation. The attribution of liability requires an explanation connecting each individual’s conduct, knowledge, and intention to the applicable form of participation. Communications, coordinated actions, practical assistance, and subsequent benefits may support an inference of intent, but their significance depends on context, timing, and consideration of plausible alternative explanations. The study develops an analytical framework linking the applicable law, the alleged role, the individual contribution, the required mental element, and the supporting evidence. It concludes that transparent and individualized reasoning is essential to distinguish joint perpetration from assistance while respecting the presumption of innocence. The findings remain doctrinal because no independently verified corpus of Jambi judgments was examined. Fu]]>
Copyrights © 2026
