The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of a blade in a public place. He argued that he had a reasonable excuse. He was driving a friend’s car and said he had no knowledge of what was in the boot and elsewhere.
Held: The offence under section 49 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 is committed where a person ‘has’ ‘with him’ a bladed article. It is clear from Crowe v Waugh 1999 JC 292 that the approach taken in Scotland is that Parliament deliberately intended not to include such factors as knowledge and intent in the section and that therefore these matters are irrelevant to the initial question of whether someone has an item with him. However, it is correct to say that a person can have an item with him without knowing of the item’s existence, at least if he ought to have been aware of it. Nevertheless, where lack of knowledge is proffered as an excuse by an accused person in evidence, as in this case, it is almost inevitable that an appropriate direction should be given to the effect that such an excuse may be found to exist by the jury. It follows, therefore, that this appeal must be allowed and the conviction quashed.
Lord Carloway
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 117
Bailii
Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995
Scotland
Crime
Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539868
