News
17th Apr 2019
Harry comments on the case of R. v D (CA) on whether, for the purpose of prosecution for having a bladed article in a public place, a purposive or literal interpretation was more appropriate to deciding whether a cut-throat razor was a “folding pocketknife” within the exemption under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139(2) and (3). Notes the extent to which the decision departs from previous cases and produces unwelcome results for the defence and the definition. (Crim LR 2019, 5, 436-439)
