Offensive Weapons
Definition of an Offensive Weapon:
- Those made for use for causing injury to the person, that is simply a weapon that is offensive.
- Those adopted for causing injury to the person, such as a bottle deliberately broken in order that the jagged end may be inserted into the victims face.
- An object not made or adapted, but one which the person carrying intends to use for the purpose of causing injury to a person.
As to (1) and (2), the Prosecution are not obliged to prove that a person had the weapon on his or her person, for the intention and purpose of causing and inflicting an injury on another person.
Examples of a weapon are:
- A disguised knife, an imitation or toy weapon.
Acts:
- S.139 Criminal Justice Act 1988 (blade/pocket knife)
- Crossbow Act 1987
- S.141, 141A Criminal Justice Act 1988
- S.1 and 2, Knives Act 1997
If you need any advice on an Offensive Weapons matter please contact us, and we will respond as soon as possible, or call us on 01923 225212.
Case Study 1
Regina .v. Taylor – St. Albans Crown Court
The Defendant was charged that without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, had with him in a public place, an offensive weapon, namely a multi tool unit, contrary to section 139(1) Criminal Justice Act 2003.
THE LAW
Any person who has an article to which this section applies with him in a public place shall be guilty of an offence. This section applies to a folding pocket knife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.On conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 4 years, or afine or both.The matter proceeded to trial.
LEGAL SUBMISSIONS at trial.
That a multi tool does not apply to a folding knife under 3 inches, and a matter of law if the multi tool falls within the definition of a folding knife or something different, and that there was no legal authority for a blade under 3 inches.The Learned Judge held that a knife has to be with a 3 inch blade, and the prosecution thereupon offered no evidence in trial.
RESULT
NOT GUILTY, PRIVATE COSTS OF THE DEFENCE ordered to be taxed from Central Funds.
Case Study 2
REGINA .v. AHMAD – KINGSTON UPON THAMES MAGISTRATES COURT
Penman Sedgwick were instructed to defend a Kingston Football Team player, after pleading guilty to possessing an illegal weapon. The weapon was purchased on e-bay in the USA, and imported into the UK. The weapon was an illegal stun gun.
Wel mitigated to the Court.
SENTENCE:
100 hours Community Service.
CASE REPORTED In:
BUCKS FREE PRESS
THIS IS HERTFORDSHIRE.CO.UK.
Download our brochure