Williamson, R. v

A converted blank-firing pistol is not a firearm under section 57(1) of the Firearms Act 1968 where it has no capacity itself to discharge a shot, bullet or missile, and can discharge a projectile only after dismantling and the use of extraneous tools. On that construction, no part of the pistol can be treated as a component part of a firearm for the relevant prohibited-firearm offence.

The appellant was convicted at Croydon Crown Court of possessing a prohibited firearm and of two Class A drug offences with intent to supply. The firearm count concerned a converted blank-firing pistol found at his home.

The prosecution relied on an experiment in which the dismantled barrel and frame, secured in a clamp and used with a modified cartridge and external striking tools, discharged a projectile. The defence contended that the pistol was incapable of operating as a firearm.

Following R v Bewley [2012] EWCA Crim 1457, the Crown conceded that the pistol was not a firearm in law. The issue was whether the firearm conviction could stand.

1. Appeal allowed in part. The court granted renewed leave to appeal and quashed the conviction for possession of a prohibited firearm contrary to section 5(1) (aba) of the Firearms Act 1968.
2. The court applied the construction adopted in R v Bewley [2012] EWCA Crim 1457. A device falls outside section 57(1) where it has no capacity itself to discharge a shot, bullet or other missile and can do so only by using tools extraneous to it.
3. That was the position here. The prosecution experiment required the pistol to be dismantled, its frame and barrel to be held in a clamp, a modified cartridge to be inserted, and the cartridge to be struck with a hammer and punch. Those steps did not show that the pistol itself could discharge a missile.
4. It followed that the pistol was incapable in law of being a firearm or a component part of one. The jury had been directed on the construction then accepted, but that construction could no longer sustain the conviction after R v Bewley.
5. The convictions and concurrent sentences on the two drug counts remained. Time spent in custody on remand continued to count towards those sentences.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): renewed leave to appeal was granted and the appeal against the prohibited-firearm conviction was allowed; that conviction was quashed: [2012] EWCA Crim 2114.
2. Crown Court at Croydon: on 14 February 2012, the appellant was convicted of the prohibited-firearm offence and two Class A drug offences with intent to supply. He received five years’ detention on the firearm count and concurrent eighteen-month terms on the drug counts.