Question for the legals! (not car related!)

[jewhoo]

A couple of my friends were out walking in the country the other day when they heard a sudden whumph-crack, followed by a long fizz. Someone had loosed a few rounds, one hit a tree about 10 feet away, another went overhead somewhere. They legged it.

They then went to track down the ttwatt and found his car. As they were walking off the guy appeared. When challenged he said he knew there was a path but didn't think he was shooting at anyone as he didn't see them. He said it was "an unfortunate accident, and i'm sure the police would view it that way". He didn't sem bothered in the slightest.

Not happy, this was reported to the police who tracked him down.

The question is, what sort of charges and punishment could this guy be looking at? He fired live ammo at MoPs on a public footpath. My mates have been told to expect to go to court, but they would like to know a few things before they get there!

DVD?

[parrot of doom]

Was this private, or public land?

[johndoc2000]

It happens. This kid may or may not walk again

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/4500619.stm

[edc]

I'm sure there are very similar cases you study as part of criminal law for LLB.

[Dwight VanDriver]

Without access to all the evidence i.e. as PofD says public or private place, airgun, air weapon, Part 1 Firearm, age of offender, prev cons, there are a multitude of possible offences, from summary to indictable.

Example of a heavy and one that could be looked at is possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life - Life imprisonment, fine or both. S 16 Firearms Act 1968.

Your friend will be a witness, presumably a statement will have been taken from him on what he saw, heard etc. If the offender is taken to Court and enters a plea of Guilty, not likely to be called but could be on a Not Guilty plea. Court/Defence may accept his evidence as documentary as per statement, but if he is called then he will be guided through what he has said in his statement and then questioned as to the truth of it by the defence.


DVD

[Zod]

If he had killed somebody, it is conceivable that he could have been charged with manslaughter. His behaviour certainly sounds as if it had the quality of recklessness required.

[jewhoo]

The gun was a proper gun, not a crappy airgun, my mates were on a public footpath at the time. The bloke said when questioned that he knew there was a public footpath in the direction he was firing, but he "wasn't aiming at them".

[jewhoo]

Update time. It was a .22 rifle. The police decided to give him a severe warning and a note on is his record to hinder all future FAC applications. That's it.

So, you can fire a .22 rifle at MoPs and get told off, or you can drive at 80 on the motorway and get points + fine. Seems a bit harsh.