Vasili, R. v

An article which retains all the characteristics of a flick-knife is an offensive weapon per se under section 1(4) of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953, even if it also has a secondary function as a lighter. That additional function does not alter the purpose shown by the article’s flicking and locking blade mechanism. The court may take judicial notice of the article’s character as an offensive weapon and direct the jury accordingly.

The appellant was convicted at Harrow Crown Court of possessing an offensive weapon contrary to section 1(1) of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953. The article was a combined lighter and flick-knife with a blade that opened automatically and locked when extended.

The Recorder ruled that it was an offensive weapon per se and withdrew that issue from the jury. The appellant appealed against conviction, contending that the lighter’s secondary function meant that the article was not made solely to cause personal injury and that the issue should have been left to the jury.

1. Appeal dismissed. The Recorder correctly ruled that the combined flick-knife and lighter was an offensive weapon per se.

2. Section 1(4) of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 identifies, among other categories, an article made for use in causing personal injury. The court accepted the reasoning in R v Simpson [1983] 3 All ER 789 that a flick-knife falls within that first category. Its design enables rapid deployment and locking of the blade, revealing the purpose for which it was made.

3. The article had all the relevant characteristics of a flick-knife. Its additional capacity to operate as a lighter did not cause it to cease being a flick-knife or remove its dangerous character. A dual-purpose article may therefore remain an offensive weapon per se where its flicking and locking blade features remain intact.

4. That classification was capable of judicial notice. The Recorder was therefore entitled to direct the jury that the article was an offensive weapon, rather than leave that issue for its determination. The conviction consequently stood.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) In [2011] EWCA Crim 615, dismissed the appeal against conviction and upheld the Recorder’s ruling that the article was an offensive weapon per se.
• Harrow Crown Court On 24 June 2010, the Recorder ruled that the combined flick-knife and lighter was an offensive weapon per se. The appellant was subsequently convicted and received a 12-month community order with 80 hours’ unpaid work.