After a judge’s ruling as to strict liability for the possession of a prohibited weapon, the defendants pleaded guilty. They now appealed against conviction. The judge had sentenced them on the basis that liability for possession was strict.
Held: Parliament had intended to impose a draconian prohibition on the possession of firearms for the obvious social purpose of controlling dangerous weapons
Judges:
Latham LJ, Pitchford JJ, Royce J
Citations:
[2008] 1 Cr App R 25, [2007] EWCA Crim 2060
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Zahid v Regina CACD 5-Oct-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of expanding ammunition, on the judge ruling that the offence was one of strict liability. . .
Cited – Jenkins v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another Admn 22-May-2020
Short term possession of stun gun
The appellant challenged the decision of the justices finding him guilty on summary conviction of an offence of possession of a weapon designed or adapted for the discharge of electrical current for incapacitation contrary to s. 5(1)(b) and Schedule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.262164
