±Forensic Focus Partners

Become an advertising partner

±Your Account


Forgotten password/username?

Site Members:

New Today: 0 Overall: 36783
New Yesterday: 0 Visitors: 115

±Follow Forensic Focus

Forensic Focus Facebook PageForensic Focus on TwitterForensic Focus LinkedIn GroupForensic Focus YouTube Channel

RSS feeds: News Forums Articles

±Latest Articles

±Latest Videos

±Latest Jobs

Appeal Case - Mobile Phone Stun Gun

Reply to topicReply to topic Printer Friendly Page
Forum FAQSearchView unanswered posts

Senior Member

Appeal Case - Mobile Phone Stun Gun

Post Posted: Feb 16, 12 00:24

Appeal Case - Mobile Phone Stun Gun


6 Whether a weapon constitutes a firearm, is a question of fact. However it is accepted as a matter of practice that a "stun gun" such as this, which discharges an electrical discharge, is a firearm.

8 Thus, as a matter of law, there is a specific offence for a weapon designed to discharge a noxious liquid, gas or "other thing". This weapon was designed for such a discharge, and thus possession of this weapon contravenes Section 5(1) (b). However, this weapon was disguised as a mobile phone. Despite the fact it is not a firearm in the ordinary sense of firing a projectile, Parliament has provided that such a disguised weapon falls within the minimum sentence provisions. For the purpose of convenience, we shall refer to the Section 5(1) (b) as the "lesser offence" and the Section 5(1A) offence as the "greater offence".

Additional reference material - trewmte.blogspot.com/2...n-gun.html
Institute for Digital Forensics (IDF) - www.linkedin.com/groups/2436720
Mobile Telephone Examination Board (MTEB) - www.linkedin.com/groups/141739
Universal Network Investigations - www.linkedin.com/groups/13536130
Mobile Telephone Evidence & Forensics trewmte.blogspot.com 

Page 1 of 1