Taking a knife to court

Postalgeek said :

exfed2 said :

Purchasing a knife in the plastic at a store and taking home would not be an issue we are talking about this woman carrying said knife around in her handbag, please don’t go off on a tangent.

I’m not the one going off on a tangent making statements like “Let’s forget court, what about the trip down the shops, the drive in the car etc etc”

Read what you wrote, and the act you cited.

Exfed2 is spot on and I dare say he’s probably had a bit of practical experience using the legislation.

Postalgeek said :

exfed2 said :

Purchasing a knife in the plastic at a store and taking home would not be an issue we are talking about this woman carrying said knife around in her handbag, please don’t go off on a tangent.

Read what you wrote, and the act you cited.

The Crimes Act 1900? What about it? I have read it a long time ago and have most aspects ingrained in my mind. Comes in useful when you need to utilise it. Which part in particular would you like me to read?

Postalgeek said :

exfed2 said :

Let’s forget court, what about the trip down the shops, the drive in the car etc etc. Is it ok for her to have the knife on these occasions? No it’s illegal!

Bollocks. Possession of a knife with a reasonable excuse, as defined by the act, is legal. And how exactly does someone get a knife home having bought it at a shop?

Yes you are. After I mentioned a person carrying a knife not purchasing one, whilst at the shops you started on ‘what if a person bought one from the shop’ which I explained. Oh my.

exfed2 said :

Purchasing a knife in the plastic at a store and taking home would not be an issue we are talking about this woman carrying said knife around in her handbag, please don’t go off on a tangent.

I’m not the one going off on a tangent making statements like “Let’s forget court, what about the trip down the shops, the drive in the car etc etc”

Read what you wrote, and the act you cited.

p1 said :

Postalgeek said :

Bollocks. Possession of a knife with a reasonable excuse, as defined by the act, is legal. And how exactly does someone get a knife home having bought it at a shop?

simply having one with you is not a crime in itself.

Yes it is, how hard is the concept of applying legislation? Sect 382 of the Crimes Act 1900. Unless you have a reasonable excuse (And the possibility that you ‘may’ have to cut something while your out although an amusing excuse, would not suffice. What if I carry my rifle around in the car ‘in case I have to shoot something’ 🙂

Postalgeek and p1,

Bollocks? OK people…….. have you actually applied the act in charging a person for this offence? I have. Let me educate you if you are caught in possession of a knife in a public place you will (should) be charged with the offence. Yes there is a defence of having a reasonable excuse such as employment requiring such an item etc.

Purchasing a knife in the plastic at a store and taking home would not be an issue we are talking about this woman carrying said knife around in her handbag, please don’t go off on a tangent. What if you need to cut something while your out! I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at these comments ‘Your honour, I may have had to cut something while I was out, I mean you never know’ 🙂

Postalgeek said :

Bollocks. Possession of a knife with a reasonable excuse, as defined by the act, is legal. And how exactly does someone get a knife home having bought it at a shop?

Exactly. While going into the court with a knife might be hard to justify, simply having one with you is not a crime in itself. What if you need to cut something while you are out?

exfed2 said :

Let’s forget court, what about the trip down the shops, the drive in the car etc etc. Is it ok for her to have the knife on these occasions? No it’s illegal!

Bollocks. Possession of a knife with a reasonable excuse, as defined by the act, is legal. And how exactly does someone get a knife home having bought it at a shop?

And I’m just saying that knives are tools as well as weapons.

Rossco Downunder said :

Police would be well advised to find out why she was there. Because, the Supreme Court lacks that metal detector.

Supreme court has a metal detector and xray system…

I’d add that if my theory is correct she was interested in Court Room 4.

All I’m pointing out is that whether or not it is typical for this individual to carry such a knife… let alone into a court.

It remains NOT typical.

Police would be well advised to find out why she was there. Because, the Supreme Court lacks that metal detector.

Postalgeek said :

.

Of course, if someone has a C scenario, I’m all ears.

Scenario C? Maybe the officer who issued the caution has a very heavy workload and saw down the dreaded tunnel which would be a charge for the offence. And excercised a little discretion

Postalgeek, the fact your obviously of the opinion that a woman is any less dangerous than a man with a sharp edged weapon tells me a lot. Physical strength has nothing to do with this. Please

Nobody is saying she had a premeditated plan to use said knife however more likely is the fact that she carries this knife about her person regularly and as Rossco pointed out saw the detectors and ‘remembered’ rather than be caught not declaring.

Fact remains for a caution to be issued an offence must be proven, it’s that simple. In this case the caution would have been in leui of a summons to attend caught for the offence I have previously mentioned.

Let’s forget court, what about the trip down the shops, the drive in the car etc etc. Is it ok for her to have the knife on these occasions? No it’s illegal!

I’m dreading the fiasco that will be called justice when the scum who shot Cst Crews stand trial. Oh the ignorance and excuses that will flow

c) the knife was planted by reptoids to discredit her, and prevent her from revealing the conspiracy to have Mully take over the ACT using subliminal messages hidden in soggy copies of the chronical.

No, I was more thinking that a woman might have a knife specifically because she wasn’t “renowned for physical strength” and it was an equaliser. If her purpose for being in the court is highly-emotional, as is likely, that might motivate some atypical behaviour. Also, a knife can be an ambush weapon as well as a melee weapon.

I think it’s atypical that a woman is carrying a knife such as that AT ALL. Would any fem-rioters like to comment on whether you have a knife alongside your lippy?

So faced with the possibility that A)a woman, a demographic not overly renowned for physical strength and violence, has planned to commit a premeditated physical assault with a melee weapon in a secure building, and having changed her mind decides to declare herself to the security checkpoint anyway instead of simply turning around, or B)that she forgot she had a knife in her bag,you’d go with A?

If you do that’s fine, but for the record I’d go with B, and I’m guessing I’d find the explanation for having the knife in scenario B probably more believable than scenario A. Looks like the police, who deal with a lot of knives, chose B too.

Of course, if someone has a C scenario, I’m all ears.

Surely if she wanted to kill someone she would build a ceramic gun and take it through the metal detectors… I saw it in a clint eastwood movie.

*Intended* Doh!

Rossco Downunder said :

Postalgeek: The Canberra Times describes it as being 22cm. So, it’s a fairly substantial knife.

Were they taking the measurement from the hilt to the blade or from the handle? This can make all the difference when putting a scare out through the media. Maybe she had really bad callouses on her feet and this was the only way to remove them, I myself use a Randall Model 14 to do my feet but that is irrellevant as this story is not about me but her.

Why dont we try to figure out who her inteded victim was through assumptions and armchair detective work? C’mon Horatio’s.