Ex-soldier faces jail for handing in gun

[Gary L]

A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty".
Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.
The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.


"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.
"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."
Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

The thing what gets me is, why didn't he just call 999 and tell them instead of the Chief Superintendant?

http://www.thisissurreytoday.co.uk/n...l/article.html

Well that law is an ass. You find a gun and hand it in you are guilty of posession no matter what. Well I know what to do now if I ever find a gun

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.
Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.]

This is very disturbing. Would not the fact that the weapon was in his garden put him in posession if it?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by zing

Well that law is an ass. You find a gun and hand it in you are guilty of posession no matter what. Well I know what to do now if I ever find a gun

He can only hope for jury nullification or someone uses common sense.

This is very disturbing. Would not the fact that the weapon was in his garden put him in posession if it?

To avoid any misunderstanding. you'll be better off throwing it out onto the street while nobody's looking. let somebody else have the problem.

[Flyboy]

Has there been any explanation as to what the gun was doing in his garden in the first place?

[budwieser]

He should`ve called the police whatever his best intentions. Silly boy.

---------- Post added at 22:53 ---------- Previous post was at 22:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

He can only hope for jury nullification or someone uses common sense.



To avoid any misunderstanding. you'll be better off throwing it out onto the street while nobody's looking. let somebody else have the problem.

If the guy threw it into the street Gary, don`t you think that the wrong person or a child may have picked it up?

[icestar2]

Originally Posted by Gary L

To avoid any misunderstanding. you'll be better off throwing it out onto the street while nobody's looking. let somebody else have the problem.

Were it could go off or a child could pick it up ? I understand your point and tbh this is really, really stupid if the storey is 100% true. I find it very disturbing if it is.

---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:54 ----------

Originally Posted by budwieser

If the guy threw it into the street Gary, don`t you think that the wrong person or a child may have picked it up?

Beat me to it

[Gary L]

I'd tell the jury I would have been better off throwing it in the street, if I'd have known I'd be in all this trouble. obviously I wouldn't. and I wouldn't advise throwing any found shotgun into the street

[Derek]

I don't believe there is not more to this story.

Members of the public handing in firearms to the Police for disposal isn't exactly a rarity and for him to be done for possession is very puzzling.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Derek S

I don't believe there is not more to this story.

I think it's odd because

"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him."

"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Did he mention he had a shotgun on any of those occasions?

[rogerdraig]

lets see what the Judge does with the sentence

but he should have just dialed 999 and waited by it

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Gary L

He can only hope for jury nullification or someone uses common sense.

It's a little late for jury nullification... the jury has already found him guilty.

From your original quote:

The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.

I think Derek is right that there is more to the story..I hope it wasn't a case of making the crime stats look good though.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Derek S

I don't believe there is not more to this story.

Members of the public handing in firearms to the Police for disposal isn't exactly a rarity and for him to be done for possession is very puzzling.

Thats what I was thinking. We probably don't know the whole story yet....

[Russ]

I's agree there's more to this than meets the eye as well - it's been a long time since I worked for the police but from what I can remember, ringing up the local Chief Super and getting a meeting with him for the next day without giving an idea what it's about would be pretty much impossible. Disctrict Nurse yes, Chief Superintendent no.

[punky]

Also the jury did have the absolute power to acquit him even though the crime is a "strict liability" or whatever. The fact they only deliberated for 20 minutes means they probably didn't even try.