Crime
Syllabus Notes
Crime is the largest of the three areas in the NPPF step two legal exam for sergeants and inspectors. These notes cover four of its topics in depth: theft, robbery and burglary; non-fatal offences and the general defences; drugs, firearms and weapons; and use of force and human rights. Statute wording was checked on legislation.gov.uk and the chapter numbers against the College's 2027 candidate handbook.
Independent information, not advice · Sources checked 4 to 19 October 2026 · England and Wales unless stated
Volume 1 of the Blackstone's Police Manuals, Crime: 17 chapters in the 2027 edition, from mens rea and general defences to drugs, firearms, assaults, sexual offences, theft, fraud and criminal damage. The College tests three areas (crime, evidence and procedure, general police duties) and draws every question from the Manuals edition for the sitting. Chapter 1.8, Weapons, is for the sergeants' exam only; everything else applies to inspectors too. In the March 2026 sergeants' paper 60 of the 140 scored questions were Crime, which describes that sitting only.
What the Crime area covers
The College's 2027 candidate handbook says the sergeants' and inspectors' exams are a single three-hour paper of 150 multiple-choice questions testing three areas: crime, evidence and procedure, and general police duties. Questions are drawn only from the 2027 edition of Blackstone's Police Manuals, and Crime is Volume 1. Road policing is not a fourth area: it is chapters 3.19 to 3.22 of General Police Duties, with its own road policing syllabus notes.
| Chapter | Title | Our notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Mens Rea (State of Mind) | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.2 | Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct) | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.3 | Incomplete Offences | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.4 | General Defences | Non-fatal offences and defences; use of force |
| 1.5 | Homicide and Related Offences | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.6 | Misuse of Drugs | Drugs, firearms and weapons |
| 1.7 | Firearms and Gun Crime | Drugs, firearms and weapons |
| 1.8 | Weapons (sergeants' exam only) | Weapons |
| 1.9 | Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.10 | Non-fatal Offences Against the Person | Non-fatal offences and defences |
| 1.11 | Offences Involving the Deprivation of Liberty | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.12 | Sexual Offences | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.13 | Sexual Offences Against Children and People with a Mental Disorder | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.14 | Child Protection | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
| 1.15 | Theft and Related Offences | Theft, robbery and burglary |
| 1.16 | Fraud | Fraud, briefly |
| 1.17 | Criminal Damage | Not covered yet: read the Manual |
All of these chapters apply to both ranks except 1.8, Weapons, which the handbook marks as sergeants' exam only. In the College's March 2026 sergeants' subject area breakdown, 60 of the 140 scored questions were Crime; in the May 2026 inspectors' breakdown, 52 of the 136 rows listed were. The College says each breakdown is valid only for its own sitting, so treat those as descriptions, not forecasts. Our what comes up in the exam guide has every published breakdown.
The exam tests only the law as it appears in the Blackstone's Manuals edition for your sitting, so use these notes to organise what you read there, not to replace it. We did not have the Manuals; each section is built on the statutes and Codes it cites, read on the date it gives. The worked questions are original practice questions from our checked bank, not real, past or leaked exam questions, and they are not endorsed by the College of Policing or Oxford University Press. Row counts from a subject breakdown describe one sitting only. Each section ends with what we could not verify.
Topics in these notes
The other areas: evidence and procedure syllabus notes, general police duties syllabus notes and road policing syllabus notes.
Theft, robbery and burglary
Theft Act 1968 sections 1 to 6, robbery, burglary and aggravated burglary, blackmail, handling, going equipped, vehicle taking, making off without payment and the Fraud Act 2006 in brief.
Theft, robbery and burglary at a glance
Theft and related offences is chapter 1.15 of the 2027 Crime Manual (1.14 in the 2026 edition), with fraud in the next chapter. Every section number, wording summary and maximum penalty below was read on legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026, in the version shown as the latest revised. For the general method, see how to pass the sergeants exam.
| Offence | What must be proved and the maximum |
|---|---|
| Theft (s.1) | Dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Ss.2 to 6 define the terms. Maximum seven years (s.7) |
| Robbery (s.8) | Steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so and in order to do so, uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force. Life |
| Burglary (s.9) | Two forms. (a) Enters as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or do unlawful damage. (b) Having entered as a trespasser, steals or attempts to steal, or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm. Fourteen years for a dwelling, ten otherwise |
| Aggravated burglary (s.10) | Any burglary where the defendant at the time has with him a firearm or imitation firearm, a weapon of offence or an explosive. Life |
| Blackmail (s.21) | With a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, makes an unwarranted demand with menaces. Fourteen years |
| Handling (s.22) | Otherwise than in the course of the stealing, knowing or believing goods to be stolen, dishonestly receives them, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another, or arranges to do so. Fourteen years |
| Going equipped (s.25) | When not at his place of abode, has with him any article for use in the course of or in connection with any burglary or theft. Three years |
| Taking a conveyance (s.12) | Without consent of the owner or other lawful authority, takes a conveyance for his own or another's use, or drives it or allows himself to be carried knowing it was taken. Summary only, six months, level 5 or both |
| Aggravated vehicle-taking (s.12A) | The s.12(1) offence with a mechanically propelled vehicle, plus dangerous driving, injury, damage to other property or damage to the vehicle. Two years, or fourteen if an accident caused a death |
| Making off without payment (Theft Act 1978 s.3) | Knowing payment on the spot is required or expected, dishonestly makes off without having paid as required or expected and with intent to avoid payment. Two years on indictment |
| Fraud (Fraud Act 2006 s.1) | False representation (s.2), failing to disclose (s.3) or abuse of position (s.4), with a dishonest intention to gain or to cause loss or risk of loss. Ten years |
| How the College listed it, March 2026 | Six rows under 'Theft and related offences' (burglary, aggravated burglary, robbery, theft, going equipped, aggravated vehicle-taking) and two under Fraud, out of 140 scored questions. That is a count of one sitting only |
The College does not publish a weighting for individual topics in advance. In the March 2026 sergeants subject breakdown (the only sitting we counted), the skill 'Theft and related offences' had six rows and 'Fraud' two, out of 140 scored questions. The College says the breakdown is valid only for that sitting. Treat the figure as a hint about how often the topic appears, not a promise about your paper.
Two other sections of these notes connect to this one: non-fatal offences and defences (grievous bodily harm turns up inside burglary) and PACE searches and arrest (stop and search for stolen articles, entry and seizure).
Theft: sections 1 to 6 Theft Act 1968
Section 1(1): a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. It is immaterial whether the appropriation is made with a view to gain or for the thief's own benefit (s.1(2)). Sections 2 to 6 interpret the five elements. Maximum on conviction on indictment: seven years (s.7).
| Element | Section | What the Act says |
|---|---|---|
| Dishonestly | s.2 | Three situations where the appropriation is not dishonest: belief in a legal right to deprive, belief the owner would consent if he knew, belief the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps (not for trustees or personal representatives). Willingness to pay does not by itself prevent dishonesty (s.2(2)). Outside those situations, the Ivey test applies (see below) |
| Appropriates | s.3(1) | Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner. Includes a later assumption of a right by keeping or dealing with property as owner, even where he came by it innocently. Good faith buyers: s.3(2) protects a later assumption of the rights the buyer believed he was acquiring |
| Property | s.4 | Money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property. Special rules: land (s.4(2)), wild mushrooms, flowers, fruit and foliage picked for non-commercial purposes (s.4(3)), wild creatures (s.4(4)). Electricity is dealt with by s.13, not theft |
| Belonging to another | s.5 | Belongs to anyone having possession or control of it or any proprietary right or interest. Extensions for trusts (s.5(2)), property received under an obligation to retain and deal with it in a particular way (s.5(3)), and property obtained by mistake where there is an obligation to restore it (s.5(4)) |
| Intention to permanently deprive | s.6 | Treating the thing as one's own to dispose of regardless of the owner's rights is enough, even without meaning the owner to lose it for ever. A borrowing counts only if for a period and in circumstances equivalent to an outright taking or disposal. Parting with property on a condition as to its return that one may not be able to perform can amount to the same (s.6(2)) |
Dishonesty outside section 2(1)
Where none of the three s.2(1) situations applies, dishonesty is decided by a two-step test. This follows the explanation in our verified practice question crime-b-01, which cites Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67 and R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575.
| Step | What the jury decides |
|---|---|
| Step 1 | Establish the defendant's actual state of knowledge or belief as to the facts. The belief need not be reasonable, though reasonableness is evidence of whether it was genuinely held |
| Step 2 | Decide whether the conduct was dishonest by the objective standards of ordinary decent people. The defendant's own view of whether it was dishonest is not the test |
| What changed | The old two-stage Ghosh test, which asked whether the defendant realised that ordinary people would regard the conduct as dishonest, was replaced by Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67 (a civil case, whose comments on the criminal test were obiter) and confirmed as applying to criminal cases in R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575 (judgment read on Find Case Law, 4 October 2026) |
Appropriation and consent
Appropriation is any assumption of the rights of an owner (s.3(1)). The verified question bank cites R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 and R v Hinks [2001] 2 AC 241 for the point that a gift or consent does not, on its own, stop the receipt being an appropriation. The owner's consent therefore goes to dishonesty, not to whether there was an appropriation. If you see a vulnerable person who 'agreed' to hand over money, work through dishonesty, and consider fraud by abuse of position under Fraud Act s.4 as well.
What you cannot steal
- Land and things forming part of land, with three exceptions in s.4(2): a trustee, personal representative or person authorised to dispose of land; a person not in possession who severs something from it; and a tenant who appropriates a fixture or structure let with the land.
- Wild mushrooms, flowers, fruit or foliage picked from wild plants, unless picked for reward, sale or other commercial purpose (s.4(3)). 'Mushroom' includes any fungus.
- Wild creatures not tamed or ordinarily kept in captivity, or their carcases, unless reduced into possession by or for another and possession not lost or abandoned, or someone is in the course of reducing them into possession (s.4(4)).
- Electricity. Not property for theft. Section 13 makes it an offence dishonestly to use without due authority, or to cause to be wasted or diverted, any electricity. Maximum five years. The verified question bank cites Low v Blease [1975] Crim LR 513 for the point.
Robbery: section 8
A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force (s.8(1)). The maximum for robbery, or for an assault with intent to rob, is life imprisonment (s.8(2)).
- There must be a theft. If the theft is not made out (for example because the defendant genuinely believed he had a legal right to the property under s.2(1)(a)), there is no robbery.
- The force or fear must be directed at 'any person'. It need not be the owner.
- Timing. Force must be immediately before or at the time of stealing. A threat to use force next week does not satisfy 'then and there'.
- Purpose. The force must be used in order to steal. Force used for an unrelated reason alongside a theft is not robbery.
- 'Seeks to put'. Robbery can be complete where the defendant seeks to put someone in fear of immediate force, whether or not the person is actually frightened.
A weapon is not an element of robbery. Our verified question crime-9 makes the same point: robbery is theft accompanied by the use or threat of force, immediately before or at the time of the theft, in order to steal. Without that element, the offence is theft, regardless of value or whether a weapon was present. A robbery with a firearm or imitation firearm is a separate matter for the firearms legislation, covered on our drugs and firearms page.
For the detention side of a robbery arrest (relevant time, reviews, extensions) see our PACE Code C page.
Burglary and aggravated burglary: sections 9 and 10
Burglary has two forms, and the most common wrong answer in this topic comes from blending them. Both require entry into a building or part of a building as a trespasser. References to a building, and to a building that is a dwelling, apply also to an inhabited vehicle or vessel, including at times when the person living in it is not there (s.9(4)).
| Form | Entry | What else is needed | Key point |
|---|---|---|---|
| s.9(1)(a) | Enters a building or part of a building as a trespasser | With intent, at the time of entry, to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or do unlawful damage | Complete on entry. Nothing need be taken or done afterwards. An empty till or an uninjured victim does not matter |
| s.9(1)(b) | Having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser | Steals or attempts to steal anything in the building or that part, or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm on any person there | No intent needed at entry. Damage is not on this list. The relevant act happens after entry |
Section 9(2) lists the offences for s.9(1)(a): stealing anything in the building or part of it, inflicting grievous bodily harm on any person there, and doing unlawful damage to the building or anything in it. The list in s.9(1)(b) is shorter: stealing or attempting to steal, and inflicting or attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm. That is why criminal damage after a lawful-intent entry is not burglary. Maximum: fourteen years where the building or part of it is a dwelling, otherwise ten (s.9(3)).
Building or part of a building
Our verified question crime-b-07 cites R v Walkington [1979] 1 WLR 1169 for the point that an area from which the public is impliedly excluded, such as behind a shop counter, can be a separate part of the building. A lawful shopper who walks into it intending to steal enters as a trespasser. The offence is complete on entry, so an empty till does not help him. A dwelling boat or caravan is covered by s.9(4) when it is inhabited, whether or not the occupier is there. Our verified question crime-b-09 uses a narrowboat to test the fourteen-year maximum.
Aggravated burglary: section 10
A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he commits any burglary and at the time has with him any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence, or any explosive (s.10(1)). The maximum is life imprisonment (s.10(2)).
| Item | Detail from s.10(1) |
|---|---|
| Firearm or imitation firearm | Firearm includes an airgun or air pistol. Imitation firearm is anything with the appearance of being a firearm, whether or not capable of being discharged |
| Weapon of offence | Any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use. An ordinary kitchen knife can qualify if he intends to use it to injure |
| Explosive | Any article manufactured for the purpose of producing a practical effect by explosion, or intended by the person having it with him for that purpose |
| The timing rule | For s.9(1)(a) the burglary is committed on entry, so the weapon must be with him then. For s.9(1)(b) it is the time of the stealing or the grievous bodily harm (R v O'Leary, as stated in the verified question explanation used in this section) |
For firearms definitions in general, and for how a householder's use of force against a burglar is judged, see our drugs and firearms page and use of force page.
Blackmail: section 21
A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces (s.21(1)). A demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief that (a) he has reasonable grounds for making the demand and (b) the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing it. The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, and it is immaterial whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand (s.21(2)). Maximum: fourteen years (s.21(3)).
- Two beliefs, not one. A genuine debt supports only the first. A defendant who believed he was owed the money still commits the offence unless he also believed the menaces were a proper way to press for it.
- Gain and loss extend only to money or other property, whether temporary or permanent. Gain includes getting what one has not (which can cover money one is owed) and keeping what one has. Loss includes not getting what one might get (s.34(2)(a)).
- Menaces are not limited to threats of violence. Threats to expose someone's private life can count (this comes from case law, which we did not open).
- Goods obtained by blackmail are regarded as stolen for the purposes of handling (s.24(4)).
Handling stolen goods: sections 22 and 24
A person handles stolen goods if, otherwise than in the course of the stealing, knowing or believing them to be stolen goods, he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so (s.22(1)). Maximum: fourteen years (s.22(2)).
- Knowledge or belief that the goods are stolen is required, together with dishonesty. Suspicion alone is not what the section says.
- 'Otherwise than in the course of the stealing'. The thief doing the stealing is charged with theft, not handling.
- What counts as stolen (s.24). The goods originally stolen and parts of them, plus goods that directly or indirectly represent them in the hands of the thief or a handler as proceeds of a disposal or realisation (s.24(2)). It applies to stealing in England and Wales or elsewhere, provided the stealing amounted to an offence where and when the goods were stolen (s.24(1)).
- When goods stop being stolen (s.24(3)). After restoration to the person from whom they were stolen or to other lawful possession or custody, or after that person and any other person claiming through him have otherwise ceased to have any right to restitution. Our verified question crime-b-10 applies this to goods seized into police custody.
- Blackmail and fraud (s.24(4)). Goods obtained by blackmail or by fraud within the meaning of the Fraud Act 2006 are regarded as stolen. For fraud, s.24(5) provides that s.24(1) is read as if references to the commencement of the Act were to the commencement of the Fraud Act 2006 and references to an offence under the Theft Act were to a s.1 Fraud Act offence.
The theft or handling of goods can also sit inside a stop and search. For the power to stop and search for stolen articles and the grounds you need, see the PACE searches and arrest page.
Going equipped: section 25
A person is guilty if, when not at his place of abode, he has with him any article for use in the course of or in connection with any burglary or theft (s.25(1)). Maximum: three years on indictment (s.25(2)). Proof that he had with him an article made or adapted for use in committing a burglary or theft is evidence that he had it with him for such use (s.25(3)). An offence under s.12(1) of taking a conveyance is treated as theft for this section (s.25(5)).
- Place of abode. The offence cannot be committed at the person's place of abode. The Act does not define it further in s.25.
- Made or adapted is evidence, not an element. An ordinary screwdriver is covered if intended for the purpose.
- Possession for fraud articles. Fraud Act s.6 covers possession or control of articles for use in or in connection with any fraud (five years), and s.8 says article includes electronic programs and data. Do not use s.25 for fraud articles: it covers burglary and theft only.
Taking a conveyance, aggravated vehicle-taking and interference
These offences exist because a joyrider often has no intention to permanently deprive, so theft cannot be proved. They are separate offences with their own elements.
| Offence | Elements | Penalty and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Taking without consent (s.12(1)) | Takes a conveyance without consent or lawful authority for his own or another's use, or, knowing it has been taken, drives it or allows himself to be carried in or on it | No intention to permanently deprive is needed. Summary only. Level 5 fine, six months or both. A defence of belief in lawful authority or in the owner's consent (s.12(6)) |
| Pedal cycles (s.12(5)) | Taking or riding a pedal cycle without consent or lawful authority. The main s.12(1) offence does not apply to pedal cycles | Summary only, fine not exceeding level 3. The belief defence in s.12(6) applies |
| Aggravated vehicle-taking (s.12A) | The s.12(1) offence in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, plus proof that after the vehicle was unlawfully taken and before it was recovered it was driven dangerously on a road or other public place, an accident caused injury, an accident caused damage to property other than the vehicle, or damage was caused to the vehicle | Indictment: two years, or fourteen if an accident caused the death of the person concerned. Defendant may avoid liability by proving the driving, accident or damage occurred before he committed the basic offence, or that he was neither in, on nor in the immediate vicinity of the vehicle at the time (s.12A(3)). If acquitted but the basic offence is proved, he may be convicted of that (s.12A(5)) |
| Interference with vehicles (Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.9) | Interferes with a motor vehicle or trailer, or with anything carried in or on it, with the intention that theft of the vehicle or part of it, theft of something carried, or a s.12(1) offence will be committed by himself or another | Summary only. Up to three months, level 4 fine or both. It is immaterial which of the three offences he intended, if one is shown |
'Conveyance' means any conveyance constructed or adapted for the carriage of a person or persons by land, water or air, with an exception for conveyances constructed or adapted for use only under the control of a person not carried in or on them (s.12(7)(a)). 'Drive' is construed accordingly. 'Owner' of a hired or hire-purchase conveyance means the person in possession under the agreement (s.12(7)(b)). A prospective amendment by the Automated Vehicles Act 2024 (Sch. 2 para. 1), shown on legislation.gov.uk on 5 October 2026 as not yet in force, will extend 'conveyance' to vehicles authorised under s.3 of that Act.
For a mechanically propelled vehicle, proceedings for the s.12(1) offence must not be commenced more than three years after the offence, and subject to that may be commenced within six months beginning with the day sufficient evidence came to the prosecutor's knowledge (s.12(4A) and (4B)). A prosecutor's certificate of that day is conclusive (s.12(4C)). These provisions displace the ordinary six-month limit for summary offences. They do not apply where the s.12(1) offence is an alternative verdict on an indictment for theft: s.12(4A) excludes proceedings falling within s.12(4).
Aggravated vehicle-taking applies to anyone who commits the basic offence in relation to a mechanically propelled vehicle, which includes allowing himself to be carried. The aggravating circumstances can occur whether the vehicle was taken by the defendant or another (s.12A(1)(b)), and the s.12A(2) circumstances do not require that he was the driver. A vehicle is driven dangerously if it falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver and it would be obvious to such a driver that driving in that way would be dangerous (s.12A(7)). It is recovered when restored to its owner or to other lawful possession or custody (s.12A(8)). For wider road policing law see our road policing law page.
Making off without payment: Theft Act 1978 section 3
A person who, knowing that payment on the spot for any goods supplied or service done is required or expected from him, dishonestly makes off without having paid as required or expected and with intent to avoid payment of the amount due, is guilty of an offence (s.3(1)). 'Payment on the spot' includes payment at the time of collecting goods on which work has been done or in respect of which service has been provided (s.3(2)). The section does not apply where the supply of the goods or the doing of the service is contrary to law, or where the service done is such that payment is not legally enforceable (s.3(3)).
- Maximum: two years on conviction on indictment (s.4(2)(b) of the 1978 Act). The Act also provides for summary conviction.
- The deferred payment trap. Our verified question crime-b-22 cites R v Vincent [2001] EWCA Crim 295: where the supplier has agreed to defer payment, payment on the spot is no longer expected, even if the agreement was obtained dishonestly. Think of fraud by false representation (Fraud Act s.2) instead.
- Why the 1978 Act still matters. Most of the 1978 Act was replaced by the Fraud Act 2006, but s.3 remains in force. We checked s.3 and s.4 only. Related: obtaining services dishonestly is s.11 Fraud Act 2006 (five years).
Fraud Act 2006, sections 1 to 8 and 11, briefly
Fraud is committed in any of three ways (s.1): by false representation (s.2), by failing to disclose information (s.3), or by abuse of position (s.4). Maximum on indictment: ten years (s.1(3)(b)). In each case the dishonest intention is to make a gain for himself or another, or to cause loss to another or expose another to a risk of loss. The offence is about the defendant's conduct and intention, so it does not depend on a gain or loss actually occurring.
| Offence | Section | Elements and maximum | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fraud by false representation | s.2 | Dishonestly makes a false representation (untrue or misleading, and he knows it is or might be) intending to gain or to cause loss or expose another to a risk of loss. Can be express or implied. May be made to a system or device | The offence is about what he intended by the representation. It does not require that anyone was actually deceived or that any gain or loss followed |
| Fraud by failing to disclose | s.3 | Dishonestly fails to disclose to another information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, intending gain or loss as above | A legal duty is needed, not just a moral one |
| Fraud by abuse of position | s.4 | Occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another, dishonestly abuses it, intending gain or loss as above. May be an omission (s.4(2)) | The carer, employee or trustee scenarios |
| Gain and loss | s.5 | Gain and loss extend only to money or other property, temporary or permanent. Gain includes keeping what one has. Loss includes not getting what one might get | Same definitions as s.34(2)(a) of the Theft Act 1968 |
| Possession of articles for use in fraud | s.6 | Has in his possession or under his control any article for use in the course of or in connection with any fraud. Five years on indictment | Article includes programs and data held in electronic form (s.8) |
| Making or supplying articles for use in fraud | s.7 | Makes, adapts, supplies or offers to supply any article knowing it is designed or adapted for fraud, or intending it to be used for fraud. Ten years on indictment | Compare s.25 Theft Act for burglary and theft articles |
Our verified bank includes questions on possession of articles for use in fraud (crime-15, citing R v Sakalauskas [2013] EWCA Crim 2278, which the National Archives judgment spells Sakalouskas), abuse of position by an employee who ignores a debt (crime-b-13) and a ticketless festival entrant (crime-b-14, s.11). We have not used those as worked questions in this section, but the Manual's fraud chapter (1.16 in 2027, 1.15 in 2026) is where the detail sits.
Maximum penalties: a quick-reference table
| Offence | Provision | Maximum |
|---|---|---|
| Theft | s.7 Theft Act 1968 | Seven years |
| Robbery, assault with intent to rob | s.8(2) | Life |
| Burglary of a dwelling | s.9(3)(a) | Fourteen years |
| Burglary of any other building | s.9(3)(b) | Ten years |
| Aggravated burglary | s.10(2) | Life |
| Blackmail | s.21(3) | Fourteen years |
| Handling stolen goods | s.22(2) | Fourteen years |
| Going equipped | s.25(2) | Three years |
| Taking a conveyance | s.12(2) | Summary only: level 5 fine, six months or both |
| Aggravated vehicle-taking | s.12A(4) | Two years; fourteen years if an accident caused death |
| Abstracting electricity | s.13 | Five years |
| Making off without payment | Theft Act 1978 s.4(2)(b) | Two years on indictment |
| Fraud | Fraud Act 2006 s.1(3) | Ten years on indictment |
| Possession of articles for fraud | Fraud Act 2006 s.6(2) | Five years on indictment |
| Making or supplying articles for fraud | Fraud Act 2006 s.7(2) | Ten years on indictment |
| Obtaining services dishonestly | Fraud Act 2006 s.11(3) | Five years on indictment |
| Interference with vehicles | Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.9(3) | Summary only: three months, level 4 fine or both |
Maximums are the figures shown in the sections as revised on legislation.gov.uk. A question about 'the maximum sentence' means the statutory maximum for the offence, not what a court would impose. For the summary-only offences listed, the statute states the limit in the same subsection. We have not checked sentencing guidelines, and the exam tests the statute as it appears in the Manual.
The traps
Multiple-choice questions on this topic tend to turn on one fact in the stem that decides which section applies. Read the stem for the timing (when was the intent formed, when was the force used, when did he pick up the weapon), for the place (a part of a building, a place of abode) and for what the property is (money, land, electricity, wild plants).
| Trap | Typical stem | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| Force that is only a threat of future harm | 'Give me your phone or I'll beat you up next week' | Not robbery. Section 8 needs force, or fear of being then and there subjected to force. Look at theft and blackmail instead |
| Force after the theft is over | A shoplifter leaves with goods and later uses violence to get away | The statute requires force immediately before or at the time of stealing and in order to steal. The Manual's treatment of when an appropriation is finished is the place to check; do not assume that any force near a theft is robbery |
| Intent formed after entry | A trespasser walks in meaning to take his own belongings, then smashes the television | No burglary. Under s.9(1)(a) the intent must exist on entry, and criminal damage is not a s.9(1)(b) act. The charge is criminal damage |
| A lawful visitor entering a part he may not enter | A customer goes behind the staff-only counter intending to take from the till | Burglary under s.9(1)(a): entry into part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal. The empty till is irrelevant |
| When the weapon must be held | Unarmed burglar picks up a knife inside, later stabs the householder while stealing | For s.9(1)(b) the relevant time is the stealing or grievous bodily harm, so aggravated burglary can be charged |
| Owner consented, so no theft? | A carer persuades a vulnerable client to give her £8,000 | Consent obtained dishonestly does not stop it being an appropriation (Gomez; Hinks, as explained in verified question crime-b-02). Look at theft and at Fraud Act s.4 |
| Repaying equivalent money | Manager takes £300 from the till planning to replace it on Monday | Still capable of being an intention to permanently deprive (s.6(1); Velumyl). Willingness to pay does not stop an appropriation being dishonest (s.2(2)) |
| Finding and keeping | Wallet found with name and address, cash kept | Section 2(1)(c) protects only a genuine belief that the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps. An address on a licence is strong evidence against that belief. Section 3(1) makes a later keeping an appropriation |
| Goods that stopped being stolen | Police recover stolen laptops, then let a buyer collect them in an operation | No full handling offence because goods restored to lawful custody are no longer stolen (s.24(3)). Attempted handling can be charged on the facts as he believed them to be (Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.1(2) and (3)) |
| Goods obtained by fraud or blackmail | Television bought using stolen card details, kept by a relative | Regarded as stolen for handling (s.24(4)). Do not answer 'no theft, so no handling' |
| Taking a car to dump it | Man with a bunch of keys and a screwdriver at 2am, says he will take a car for a spin and dump it | Taking a conveyance is not theft, but s.25(5) treats a s.12(1) offence as theft for going equipped. The article does not need to be made or adapted for the purpose |
| Deferred payment and making off | Guest persuades the owner to let him pay next week, never intending to | Making off is unlikely to succeed once payment on the spot is no longer expected (R v Vincent, as cited in the verified question). Consider Fraud Act s.2 |
| Electricity | Meter bypassed with a cable | Electricity is not property under s.4, so not theft (Low v Blease). Section 13 abstracting electricity is the charge |
| Mushrooms and flowers | Man leaves woodland with 20 kg of wild mushrooms picked without permission | Section 4(3): picking wild mushrooms, flowers, fruit or foliage is not theft unless done for reward, sale or other commercial purpose. Read the facts for a commercial purpose |
| Debt and blackmail | Builder threatens to tell the customer's employer unless she pays what she owes | Both beliefs are needed to make a demand warranted: reasonable grounds for the demand and that the menaces are a proper means. A real debt answers only the first |
Several of the best-known distractors offer the most serious-sounding offence: robbery for a future threat, aggravated burglary for an unarmed entry, theft for a car taking. The correct answer is usually the offence whose elements the stem actually satisfies, which can be a lesser offence (criminal damage, theft, blackmail, taking a conveyance or fraud).
Six mistakes to stop making
- Reading 'burglary' as one offence. The two forms have different mental elements and different lists of acts. Always ask which subsection the facts fit.
- Treating any force near a theft as robbery. Force must be used in order to steal, and immediately before or at the time of stealing.
- Calling a car taking 'theft'. It is the separate s.12(1) offence, summary only, with no intention to permanently deprive required.
- Forgetting that goods can stop being stolen. Restoration to the owner or other lawful possession or custody ends the status (s.24(3)). Police custody can count as lawful custody (see crime-b-10).
- Using the old Ghosh dishonesty test. The bank's verified explanation says Ivey replaced it and Barton and Booth applied Ivey to criminal law.
- Quoting the wrong maximum. Dwelling burglary is fourteen years, other burglary ten, aggravated burglary life, theft seven, handling and blackmail fourteen.
Worked questions from our verified bank
Six original practice questions from our checked bank (not real or past exam questions). The correct option is marked, and the explanation says why the others fail.
Outside a school, a 16-year-old tells a younger pupil: 'Give me your phone, or I'll find you after school next week and beat you up.' The frightened pupil hands it over and the older youth walks off. Why is this not robbery?
Section 8(1) Theft Act 1968 requires force on any person, or putting or seeking to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force, immediately before or at the time of stealing and in order to steal. A threat of violence next week does not meet the 'then and there' requirement. A threat can be enough for robbery if it is of immediate force, so the first option is wrong; theft (consent obtained by threats does not prevent appropriation) and blackmail should be considered here.
Source: Theft Act 1968 ss.8 and 21
A man goes into his former partner's house, knowing he has no permission to be there, intending only to collect his own belongings. Once inside he loses his temper and smashes her television. He steals nothing and injures nobody. Has he committed burglary?
Under s.9(1)(a) Theft Act 1968 the intent to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or do unlawful damage must exist at the moment of entry as a trespasser; taking back his own property is not an intent to steal. Section 9(1)(b) is limited to stealing or attempting to steal, and inflicting or attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm, after entry. Unlawful damage appears only in the s.9(1)(a) list, so the correct charge here is criminal damage, not burglary.
Source: Theft Act 1968 s.9(1) and (2)
During opening hours a customer in a department store walks round behind a staff-only till counter, intending to take cash from the till. He pulls the drawer open but it is empty, and he walks away. Which offence is best made out?
Section 9(1) Theft Act 1968 applies to entry into a building or part of a building. The Court of Appeal in R v Walkington held that the area behind a shop counter, from which customers are impliedly excluded, can be a separate part of the building, so a lawful shopper becomes a trespasser by entering it. Burglary under s.9(1)(a) is complete on entry with intent to steal; the empty till is irrelevant. Going equipped requires an article for use in theft, which is not described here.
Source: Theft Act 1968 s.9(1)(a); R v Walkington [1979] 1 WLR 1169
A burglar enters a house as a trespasser, unarmed, intending to steal. In the kitchen he picks up a kitchen knife. Upstairs the householder confronts him; he stabs her, causing grievous bodily harm, and leaves with a laptop. Can aggravated burglary be charged?
Section 10(1) Theft Act 1968 requires the burglar to have a weapon of offence (among other things) with him at the time of the burglary. For a s.9(1)(a) burglary that is the moment of entry, but for s.9(1)(b) it is the time of the stealing or inflicting of grievous bodily harm (R v O'Leary). A kitchen knife becomes a weapon of offence when the person having it with him intends to use it to cause injury. Aggravated burglary carries a maximum of life imprisonment.
Source: Theft Act 1968 ss.9(1)(b) and 10; R v O'Leary (1986) 82 Cr App R 341
On a Friday a shop manager takes £300 in banknotes from the till to spend over the weekend. He tells officers he always intended to put £300 of his own money back on Monday so the shop would not lose out. On the question of intention to permanently deprive, which statement is correct?
The property appropriated is the specific notes, and he intended to spend them, treating them as his own to dispose of regardless of the owner's rights (s.6(1) Theft Act 1968). The Court of Appeal in R v Velumyl held that an intention to replace taken money with its equivalent does not prevent an intention to permanently deprive. His plan to repay may be relevant to dishonesty, but s.2(2) provides that an appropriation can be dishonest even though the person is willing to pay.
Source: Theft Act 1968 ss.2(2) and 6(1); R v Velumyl [1989] Crim LR 299
A guest with no money stays a week at a guest house. On the last morning he persuades the owner to let him leave and pay next week, falsely claiming his wages have been delayed. He never intended to pay and never does. What is the best advice on charge?
Section 3(1) Theft Act 1978 requires the defendant to make off without paying 'as required or expected', knowing payment on the spot is required or expected. In R v Vincent the Court of Appeal held that where the supplier has agreed to defer payment, payment on the spot is no longer expected, even if the agreement was obtained dishonestly. His false statement about his wages, made dishonestly to gain by keeping his money or cause loss, fits fraud by false representation under s.2 Fraud Act 2006.
Source: Theft Act 1978 s.3; R v Vincent [2001] EWCA Crim 295; Fraud Act 2006 s.2
Where this sits in Blackstone's: chapter map
Chapter numbers are from Appendix A of the College's 2027 candidate handbook (September 2026), with the 2026 edition's number in brackets. The 2027 Crime volume added a chapter before this one, so theft moved from 1.14 to 1.15 and fraud from 1.15 to 1.16; the sub-headings are unchanged.
| Chapter | Title | What it covers | How we would treat it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.15.1 (1.14.1) | Introduction | Context for the Theft Act 1968 offences | Read first, quickly |
| 1.15.2 (1.14.2) | Theft | Ss.1 to 7: dishonesty, appropriation, property, belonging to another, intention to permanently deprive | Highest priority. Make cards for every s.2 situation and every s.4 exception |
| 1.15.3 (1.14.3) | Robbery | S.8: force, fear of being then and there subjected to force, timing | High. Practise telling robbery from theft with a threat |
| 1.15.4 (1.14.4) | Blackmail | S.21: unwarranted demand with menaces, the two beliefs, gain and loss | Medium |
| 1.15.5 (1.14.5) | Burglary | S.9: two forms, trespasser, building and part of a building, inhabited vehicles and vessels | Highest priority. Draw the two forms side by side |
| 1.15.6 (1.14.6) | Aggravated Burglary | S.10: firearm, weapon of offence, explosive, timing | High |
| 1.15.7 (1.14.7) | Taking a Conveyance without Consent | S.12: elements, defences, pedal cycles, time limits | Medium. Do not confuse with theft |
| 1.15.8 (1.14.8) | Aggravated Vehicle-taking | S.12A: the four circumstances, defence, alternative verdict | Medium |
| 1.15.9 (1.14.9) | Interfering with Vehicles | Criminal Attempts Act 1981 s.9 | Low to medium. Short |
| 1.15.10 (1.14.10) | Going Equipped | S.25: not at place of abode, article, evidence of intent | Medium |
| 1.15.11 (1.14.11) | Handling Stolen Goods | Ss.22 and 24: forms of handling, what counts as stolen, when goods stop being stolen | Medium to high |
| 1.15.12 (1.14.12) | Making off Without Payment | Theft Act 1978 s.3 | Medium. Short, with a known trap |
| 1.15.13 (1.14.13) | Proceeds of Crime | Not covered in this section | Read the Manual chapter separately |
| 1.16 (1.15) | Fraud (1.16.1 to 1.16.10) | Fraud Act 2006: fraud, gain and loss, false representation, failing to disclose, abuse of position, articles, obtaining services, false accounting | Brief coverage here (ss.1 to 8 and s.11). The rest of the chapter is for your own reading |
The priorities in the right-hand column are our own judgement, not a College weighting. Fraud is a separate chapter in the same volume (1.16 in 2027), so a fraud question can sit next to a theft question and share the 'gain and loss' definitions.
Worked scenarios
These scenarios use the same facts as the verified practice questions above and the traps table, written as short reasoning exercises.
A 16-year-old tells a younger pupil outside school: 'Give me your phone, or I'll find you after school next week and beat you up.' The pupil hands it over. Robbery fails because s.8 requires fear of being then and there subjected to force, and next week is not then and there. The theft analysis is unaffected, since consent obtained by threats does not prevent appropriation. A demand with menaces made with a view to gain is also the shape of blackmail. In an exam question, find the offence that matches the facts, not the most serious-sounding one.
A man enters his former partner's house knowing he has no permission, intending only to collect his own belongings. Once inside he loses his temper and smashes her television. The question is intent at the moment of entry. Collecting his own property is not an intent to steal (and s.2(1)(a) deals with a belief in a legal right to deprive). So s.9(1)(a) fails. Section 9(1)(b) lists stealing and grievous bodily harm after entry, not damage. The answer is criminal damage, not burglary.
A customer in a department store, during opening hours, walks round behind a staff-only till counter intending to take cash, opens the drawer and finds it empty. He had permission to be in the shop but not behind the counter. The stem tells you what he intended on entering that part, so s.9(1)(a) is complete on entry. The empty till is a distraction. 'Going equipped' is another distraction: the question describes no article.
A burglar enters unarmed intending to steal, picks up a kitchen knife, stabs the householder upstairs causing grievous bodily harm and leaves with a laptop. Do not stop at 'he was unarmed on entry'. For a s.9(1)(a) burglary the weapon must be with him on entry, but for s.9(1)(b) the relevant time is the stealing or the infliction of harm, and he had the knife then. Aggravated burglary can be charged. 'Robbery and wounding instead' is a wrong option because force used on an occupant does not stop burglary being available.
A manager takes £300 from the till on Friday to spend over the weekend, meaning to put £300 of his own money back on Monday. The notes he took are the property appropriated, and he intended to spend them as his own. That is an intention to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the owner's rights (s.6(1)). His plan to repay is not a defence on intention, and s.2(2) says an appropriation can be dishonest even if the person is willing to pay. Dishonesty is still for the jury under the Ivey test.
A guest with no money stays a week. On the last morning he persuades the owner to let him pay next week, falsely claiming delayed wages, never intending to pay. Making off without payment under the 1978 Act requires making off without paying as required or expected, knowing payment on the spot is required or expected. Once the owner agreed to defer payment, payment on the spot was no longer expected, even though the agreement was dishonestly obtained. The false statement fits fraud by false representation under Fraud Act s.2 better.
Theft Act revision checklist
- Can write out s.1 and name the section that defines each of the five elements.
- Can list the three s.2(1) situations and apply s.2(2).
- Can state the modern two-step dishonesty test and why Ghosh is no longer used.
- Knows the s.3(1) rule on later keeping, and the s.3(2) good faith purchaser rule.
- Knows the s.4 exceptions: land, wild mushrooms, flowers, fruit and foliage, wild creatures, and that electricity falls under s.13.
- Can explain s.6 borrowing and replacing money.
- Can explain 'then and there' and 'in order to steal' for robbery.
- Can draw s.9(1)(a) and s.9(1)(b) side by side and say what each list contains.
- Can apply the s.10 timing rule for each form of burglary.
- Can recite the maximum penalties in the table above without looking.
- Can state both beliefs needed for a warranted demand under s.21.
- Knows when goods stop being stolen (s.24(3)) and that fraud and blackmail goods are regarded as stolen (s.24(4)).
- Knows what s.25(5) does for the TWOC joyrider.
- Has done at least two timed mixed sets with theft, burglary and robbery questions in them.
Next steps: read non-fatal offences and defences, then build a timetable with our sergeant exam revision plan.
What we could not verify
- How the Manual words each point. We read the statutes, not the Manuals. Where the Manual's treatment differs in emphasis, the exam follows the Manual. The case names in this section come from our verified question bank. On 4 October 2026 we read the judgment text of Barton and Booth and of Sakalouskas on the National Archives Find Case Law site, the Supreme Court's case page for Ivey, and the CPS Theft Act offences guidance, which cites Vincent and Gomez. Walkington and O'Leary were confirmed only from secondary case summaries. We could not open any source for Hinks, Velumyl or Low v Blease, so those three rest on the bank explanation alone and bailii.org was not reachable.
- Robbery timing and continuing appropriation. We have not set out how the courts treat when an appropriation ends for the purposes of s.8. Read the Manual's robbery section for it.
- Mens rea of trespass. We have not covered what the defendant must know about his status as a trespasser, which is for the Manual's burglary section.
- Low-value shoplifting. We have not covered how value affects the mode of trial for theft. On 5 October 2026 legislation.gov.uk showed s.22A Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (shoplifting of goods worth £200 or less triable only summarily, unless an adult elects Crown Court trial) still in force, and Crime and Policing Act 2026 s.47, which omits s.22A for offences committed after it comes into force, as prospective. None of the three commencement regulations so far brings s.47 into force. Check the Manual.
- Crime and Policing Act 2026 s.171 commencement. New Theft Act ss.26A to 26C were not in force at Royal Assent and are commenced by regulations. On 4 October 2026 legislation.gov.uk showed s.171 as prospective and none of the three commencement regulations so far (SI 2026/689, 2026/939, 2026/960) covers it, but new regulations can follow. We do not know whether your edition covers them.
- Proceeds of crime (1.15.13 in 2027), false accounting and the rest of the fraud chapter. Not covered here.
Non-fatal offences and defences
Assault and battery, ABH, wounding and GBH, threats to kill, emergency workers, consent, strangulation, and the general defences of self-defence, mistake, intoxication and duress.
Non-fatal offences and defences at a glance
Non-fatal offences against the person is chapter 1.10 of the Crime Manual and the general defences are chapter 1.4. The human rights side of force, such as Article 2 and lethal force, is in the use of force and human rights section below, so we do not repeat it here. To plan your revision, see the sergeant exam revision plan.
| Offence | What it is | Mode of trial and maximum |
|---|---|---|
| Common assault, s.39 CJA 1988 | Intentionally or recklessly causing another to apprehend immediate unlawful violence | Summary only. Maximum 6 months or a fine (CPS guidance; s.39) |
| Battery, s.39 CJA 1988 | Intentional or reckless application of unlawful force; usually charged as assault by beating | Summary only. Maximum 6 months or a fine |
| Assault on constable, s.89(1) Police Act 1996 | Assault on a constable, or a person assisting, in the execution of duty | Summary. 6 months or a fine up to level 5. s.89(2) resist or obstruct: 1 month or level 3 |
| Emergency worker, s.1 2018 Act | Common assault or battery on an emergency worker acting in the exercise of their functions | Either way. Up to 2 years on indictment |
| ABH, s.47 OAPA 1861 | Assault or battery occasioning actual bodily harm | Either way. Maximum 5 years (see the maximum penalties trap) |
| Wounding or inflicting GBH, s.20 | Unlawfully and maliciously wounding or inflicting GBH; foresight that some harm might result | Either way. Maximum 5 years (see the maximum penalties trap) |
| Wounding or GBH with intent, s.18 | Wounding or causing GBH with intent to do GBH, or intent to resist or prevent lawful apprehension | Indictable only. Maximum life |
| Threats to kill, s.16 | Without lawful excuse, a threat to kill intending the recipient to fear it would be carried out | Either way. Maximum 10 years |
| Strangulation or suffocation, s.75A SCA 2015 | Intentionally strangling, or any other act affecting breathing that is a battery | Either way. Maximum 5 years on indictment; in force 7 June 2022 |
| Assault to resist arrest, s.38 OAPA 1861 | Assault with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of any person | Either way. Maximum 2 years (s.38) |
In the College's March 2026 sergeants' subject area breakdown we counted six scored rows under Non-fatal offences against the person (assault offences twice, consent, other assault offences, strangulation or suffocation, and threats to kill) and two under General defences (duress, and inadvertence and mistake), out of 140 scored questions. That is a count of that one sitting only. The College says the breakdown is valid only for March 2026 and must not be used to predict future papers, so do not read it as a weighting. Note too that no row in that sitting was labelled self-defence or use of force, which tells you nothing about the next paper.
Common assault and battery
Section 39(1) Criminal Justice Act 1988 makes common assault and battery summary offences, liable to a fine up to level 5, imprisonment for up to six months, or both. Section 39(2) makes that subject to s.1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, covered below. The statute does not define the two offences. The CPS charging guidance gives the working definitions:
- Common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence.
- Battery is the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force to another person. Where battery is charged, the CPS says it should be put as assault by beating.
The exam angle is that the two are separate. No injury is needed for either. Words and even silence can form an assault if they cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force, and the verified practice question on silent telephone calls rests on R v Ireland.
| Point | Rule | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Usual time limit | Proceedings for a summary only offence must start within six months of the offence | s.127 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, as stated in the CPS guidance |
| Domestic abuse battery or common assault | Where the behaviour amounts to domestic abuse, proceedings may be commenced at any time that is both within two years of the offence and within six months of the first date on which the complainant gave a witness statement to the police or was video interviewed by them | s.39A CJA 1988 |
| Assault on a constable | Assaults a constable in the execution of duty, or a person assisting: six months or a fine up to level 5, or both | s.89(1) Police Act 1996 |
| Resist or obstruct a constable | One month or a fine up to level 3, or both | s.89(2) Police Act 1996 |
| Assault to resist arrest | Assault with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of himself or anyone else for any offence; two years | s.38 OAPA 1861 |
| Reasonable force by a constable under PACE | Where PACE confers a power and does not make it depend on consent, the officer may use reasonable force, if necessary | s.117 PACE 1984 |
Note that s.89 asks whether the officer was acting in the execution of their duty. The CPS guidance observes that the duties of a police officer are not defined in statute, and suggests adding common assault or battery as an alternative charge where that is in doubt, because the conduct is an assault anyway.
ABH, wounding and grievous bodily harm
The three harm offences in the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 are best learned as a ladder. Each rung adds a kind of harm, and ss.18 and 20 differ from each other only in the mental element.
| Offence | Conduct and result | State of mind | Points to remember |
|---|---|---|---|
| Common assault | Fear of immediate unlawful force | Intent or recklessness | No injury needed. Silent calls can be enough on the right facts (R v Ireland) |
| Battery | Unlawful force applied | Intent or recklessness | Touching can be enough; no injury needed |
| ABH, s.47 | Assault or battery causing actual bodily harm | Intent or recklessness as to the assault; none as to the harm | More than transient and trifling; recognised psychiatric illness can count with medical evidence |
| Wounding or GBH, s.20 | Wound, or inflict GBH, with or without a weapon | Intend or foresee that some harm might result (Savage; Parmenter) | Wound means a break in the continuity of the skin. GBH means really serious harm |
| Wounding or GBH, s.18 | Wound, or cause GBH | Intent to do GBH, or intent to resist or prevent lawful apprehension | Intent is the whole difference from s.20. Life maximum |
Section 47: assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Section 47 covers assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The CPS guidance describes it as an intentional or reckless assault causing ABH. The harm need not be permanent but must be more than transient and trifling (it cites R v Donovan). R v Brown confirmed that consent may be a defence to battery but not to ABH or GBH. The CPS also says that psychological injury short of a recognisable psychiatric illness is not bodily harm, and that psychiatric injury should be supported by medical evidence (R v D, R v Chan-Fook). Our verified bank question on ABH takes the same line: an injury that interferes with health or comfort, with no need for a weapon or hospital treatment.
Sections 20 and 18: wounding and GBH
GBH means really serious harm, which need not be permanent or dangerous (the CPS cites R v Golding). A wound needs a break in the continuity of the skin. Section 20 is unlawfully and maliciously wounding, or inflicting GBH, with or without a weapon. In s.20 the defendant must intend or foresee that the act might cause some harm, per R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter. Because an attempt needs intent as to the consequence, the CPS notes you cannot attempt s.20: the intended version is s.18.
Section 18 requires wounding or causing GBH with intent to do GBH, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person. It is indictable only. The CPS adds that the second limb can be used where the injury is GBH but the intent to resist or prevent apprehension is clearer than the intent to do GBH. The statute includes a wounding offence of either kind; the exam will usually tell you what the defendant meant.
The 1861 Act text on legislation.gov.uk that applies to Northern Ireland sets a seven year maximum for ss.20 and 47. The England and Wales text no longer states a number. The five year maximum for each follows from the enacted three years of penal servitude, raised to up to five by s.1(1) Penal Servitude Act 1891, and converted to imprisonment by s.1(1) Criminal Justice Act 1948; the CPS guidance also states five years. A question set for a sergeants exam in England and Wales takes the England and Wales figure.
Threats to kill: s.16
Section 16 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is committed by a person who, without lawful excuse, makes to another a threat, intending that that other would fear it would be carried out, to kill that other or a third person. The maximum on indictment is ten years, and the CPS says the offence is triable either way.
- Intent is aimed at fear. The defendant must intend the person receiving the threat to fear it would be carried out. They need not intend to carry it out.
- The victim's reaction is evidence, not an element. The CPS guidance says the effect on the recipient may support the case on intention, but intention is what must be proved.
- A third person can be the target. The threat can be to kill someone other than the person who hears it, but the fear intended must be that of the person to whom the threat was made.
- Words are enough. The statute speaks of a threat and, unlike assault, does not mention immediacy.
- Lawful excuse. The statute says without lawful excuse. We have not verified the Manuals' treatment of what counts.
The CPS lists factors for assessing intent, including the history between the parties, the suspect's antecedent history, a weapon, the suspect's demeanour, the effect on the recipient and any admissions.
Assaults on emergency workers
Section 1 Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 applies to an offence of common assault or battery committed against an emergency worker acting in the exercise of functions as such a worker. Section 1(2) gives up to the general limit in a magistrates' court on summary conviction, and up to two years on indictment. The two year figure came from the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, in force from 28 June 2022 per the revised text; the original maximum was 12 months. Section 1(3) extends the offence to circumstances where the victim is not at work but is doing something that would have been in the exercise of their functions if done in work time.
| Group | How the Act describes them |
|---|---|
| Police | A constable; a person other than a constable who has the powers of a constable or is otherwise employed for police purposes or engaged to provide services for police purposes |
| National Crime Agency | A National Crime Agency officer |
| Prisons and custody | A prison officer; a person employed or engaged to carry out similar functions in a custodial institution; a prisoner custody officer or custody officer, so far as relating to escort functions |
| Fire and rescue | A person employed or engaged to provide fire services or fire and rescue services; a person employed or engaged to provide search services or rescue services (or both) |
| NHS | A person employed or engaged to provide NHS health services, or services supporting them, whose general activities in doing so involve face to face interaction with individuals receiving the services or with other members of the public |
| Paid or unpaid | It is immaterial whether the employment or engagement is paid or unpaid (s.3(2)) |
The practice question in the worked section turns on the PCSO: s.3(1)(b) covers someone other than a constable who is employed for police purposes. The CPS guidance adds that, apart from the offence itself, s.68A Sentencing Act 2020 requires a court sentencing an assault on a person providing a public service or performing a public duty to treat that as an aggravating factor and say so in open court.
Consent
The rule the exam keeps testing is that consent is a defence to battery but not, in general, to the infliction of ABH or worse. The CPS guidance states the principle from R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212 as: consent may be a defence to battery but not to the infliction of any more serious harm, absent good reason for a recognised exception. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 has since put part of that into statute.
| Offence | Is consent a defence? | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Common assault and battery | Consent can be a defence | R v Brown as the CPS states it; the exceptions are in Blackstone's chapter 1.10 |
| ABH, wounding, GBH (ss.47, 20, 18) | Consent is not a defence unless a recognised exception applies | R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212; CPS guidance |
| Harm for sexual gratification | Consent is not a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47 | s.71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021. Narrow STI exception in s.71(4) for ss.20 and 47 only |
| Strangulation or suffocation, s.75A | Statutory defence if the defendant shows consent, but lost if serious harm results and the defendant intended or was reckless as to serious harm | s.75A(2) to (4) Serious Crime Act 2015 |
Section 71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021
Section 71 provides that it is not a defence that the victim consented to the infliction of serious harm for the purposes of obtaining sexual gratification. It applies to offences under ss.18, 20 and 47. Serious harm means GBH, wounding or ABH. It does not matter whether the harm was inflicted for the gratification of D, V or someone else (s.71(5)). Subsection (4) disapplies the rule for ss.20 and 47 where the harm consists of or results from infection with a sexually transmitted infection during sexual activity and V consented to the activity knowing or believing that D had the infection. Subsection (6) says other rules about when consent may or may not be a defence are untouched.
If a question mentions harm and sexual gratification and an offence under the 1861 Act, think s.71. If it mentions strangulation or breath-affecting acts, think s.75A(2) to (4), which has its own statutory consent defence with its own serious harm limit. The two are different rules.
Strangulation and suffocation: s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015
Section 70(1) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 inserted s.75A into the Serious Crime Act 2015. It came into force on 7 June 2022 (SI 2022/553). The offence is for England and Wales, applies to everyone, not only to domestic abuse cases, and the CPS says it is not retrospective. Section 75B extends it to acts abroad by a UK national or someone habitually resident in England and Wales.
| Element | Rule | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Strangulation | A intentionally strangles B | s.75A(1)(a) |
| Suffocation | A does any other act to B that affects B's ability to breathe and constitutes battery of B | s.75A(1)(b) |
| Mental element, strangulation | An intentional act. No intent to injure is required and the CPS says it cannot be committed recklessly | CPS guidance |
| Mental element, suffocation | Needs a battery, so it can be committed intentionally or recklessly | CPS guidance |
| Injury or breathing impaired | The CPS says none need be proved for strangulation | CPS guidance |
| Meaning | No statutory definition. Ordinary meaning: pressure or compression around the neck for strangulation; depriving someone of air affecting normal breathing for suffocation | CPS guidance |
| Consent defence | A defence if B consented, which A must show, but lost where B suffers serious harm and A intended or was reckless as to serious harm | s.75A(2), (3) |
| How the defence is shown | Taken as shown if sufficient evidence is adduced to raise the issue and the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt | s.75A(4) |
| Serious harm | GBH or wounding within s.18 OAPA 1861, or ABH within s.47 | s.75A(6) |
| Penalty | Summary: the general limit in a magistrates' court or a fine. Indictment: up to 5 years or a fine | s.75A(5) |
| Aggravated form | A racially or religiously aggravated form: s.29(1)(ba) Crime and Disorder Act 1998, inserted by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, with up to 7 years on indictment under s.29(2) | s.29 CDA 1998; CPS guidance |
ABH, strangulation and suffocation carry the same sentencing powers, but the CPS says that where there is clear and credible evidence of strangulation or suffocation it should be charged rather than ABH, because that is what the offender's record will show. In an exam question about an act that restricts breathing, check whether it is the neck (strangulation) or any other act affecting breathing that is also a battery (suffocation), then check consent and the serious harm exception.
Self-defence, prevention of crime and reasonable force
Section 76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 applies where, on a charge of an offence, the question arises whether the degree of force used by the defendant against another was reasonable in the circumstances and an issue arises whether D is entitled to rely on one of three defences: the common law defence of self-defence, the common law defence of defence of property, or the defences in s.3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (force in the prevention of crime or in making or assisting a lawful arrest). The Criminal Law Act s.3(1) says a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for those purposes. It is not limited to constables.
| Point | Rule | Subsection |
|---|---|---|
| Which defences | Common law self-defence (including defence of another), common law defence of property, and s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 | s.76(2), (10)(b) |
| How the circumstances are fixed | By reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be | s.76(3) |
| Honest mistake | D may rely on a genuinely held belief, even if mistaken and even if unreasonable. Reasonableness goes to whether it was genuinely held | s.76(4) |
| Drink | No reliance on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication | s.76(5) |
| Ordinary case | Disproportionate force is not reasonable | s.76(6) |
| Householder case | Only grossly disproportionate force is automatically unreasonable | s.76(5A), (8A) to (8F) |
| Retreat | A factor, so far as relevant; not a duty | s.76(6A) |
| Instinct | A person may not be able to weigh the exact measure of necessary action; an honest and instinctive decision is strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken | s.76(7) |
| What counts as force | The type and amount of force used | s.76(10)(c) |
The householder case
The householder rule is narrower than most candidates assume. Section 76(8A) defines a householder case by four conditions, and a defendant who misses one is in the ordinary case where disproportionate force is not reasonable.
| Condition | Detail | Subsection |
|---|---|---|
| Defence | Common law self-defence | (8A)(a). Not s.3(1) CLA, so it does not cover force used to prevent crime or make an arrest, such as a shop guard detaining a thief |
| Place | In or partly in a building or part of a building that is a dwelling or forces accommodation (or both). A building includes a vehicle or vessel | (8A)(b), (8F) |
| Status | D is not a trespasser when the force is used | (8A)(c) |
| Belief | D believed V to be in, or entering, the building or part as a trespasser | (8A)(d); belief rules in (4) and (5) apply under (8D) |
| Workplace link | A workplace internally accessible from the dwelling, and the access between them, is treated as part of the dwelling | (8B); forces accommodation (8C) |
In a householder case, force that is grossly disproportionate is not to be regarded as reasonable, which implies that force that is merely disproportionate may still be reasonable. This page does not cover Article 2 and the human rights rules for lethal force: use the use of force and human rights page and our supervisor's guide to the legal test.
The chapter list has a separate heading for police officers (1.4.7) and for use of force to defend, prevent crime and to arrest (1.4.6). Section 117 PACE separately allows a constable to use reasonable force, if necessary, in exercising a PACE power that does not depend on someone else's consent. Do not mix the two: s.117 is a power to use force when exercising a PACE power, while s.76 governs how the reasonableness of force is judged on the defences in subsection (2).
Mistake, intoxication and duress
Mistake
For self-defence and the s.3 defences, the rule is statutory. Section 76(3) fixes the circumstances as D believed them to be and s.76(4) lets D rely on a genuinely held belief whether or not it was mistaken, and whether or not the mistake was reasonable. Reasonableness is relevant only to whether the belief was genuinely held. Our verified practice bank cites R v Williams (Gladstone) for the underlying principle.
Intoxication
Two separate rules sit here and candidates blur them. The first is s.76(5): a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication cannot be relied on for the reasonable force test. The second is the Majewski rule, as stated in our verified bank question: evidence of voluntary intoxication can be considered on whether the defendant formed the specific intent needed for s.18, but it is no defence to s.20, which is a basic intent offence where recklessness is enough. A defendant too drunk to form the s.18 intent may still be convicted of s.20, and an intent formed while drunk is still an intent. We have verified the statutory part from legislation.gov.uk; the Majewski point is taken from our bank only and we have not opened the case itself.
Duress
Our verified bank records that duress by threats is not available to murder, as principal or secondary party (R v Howe), or to attempted murder (R v Gotts); that it can be raised to s.18 in principle; and that under R v Hasan it is unavailable to a person who voluntarily associated with others he foresaw, or ought reasonably to have foreseen, might compel him by threats of violence, without needing to foresee the particular crime. The chapter list also has 1.4.4 on duress of circumstances, which we have not covered. Read the duress headings in chapter 1.4 for the full tests.
The traps that write wrong answers
These are the confusions we expect to see in distractors, based on the law as verified above. They are our reading of where options go wrong, not a description of any real paper.
| Trap | The wrong thought | The right answer |
|---|---|---|
| Assault versus battery | Treating a push as an assault only, or a threat as a battery | Fear of force is assault; applied force is battery. Both are common assault in s.39 terms |
| ABH needs intent to harm | Choosing the option that demands intent to cause serious harm | Only the assault needs intent or recklessness. The harm need not be intended or foreseen |
| s.20 wording | Thinking s.20 needs intent to cause GBH | That is s.18. For s.20, foresight that some harm might result is enough per the CPS guidance |
| Wound means any cut | Calling a bruise or internal bleeding a wound | A wound is a break in the continuity of the skin (CPS guidance) |
| Maximum penalties | Mixing 5, 7 and 10 years | s.47 and s.20: 5 years (see the 7 year trap callout for how this is derived). s.16: 10. s.18: life. s.75A: 5. Emergency worker battery: 2. s.39: 6 months. The 7 year figure in the 1861 Act text is the Northern Ireland version |
| Strangulation section number | Quoting s.70 DA Act as the offence | Offence is s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015, inserted by s.70 DA Act 2021 |
| Strangulation needs injury or intent to harm | Looking for a consequence | The CPS guidance says no injury and no impeded breathing need be proved; strangulation is an intentional act and cannot be committed recklessly |
| Suffocation mens rea | Assuming it matches strangulation | Suffocation is any act affecting breathing that is a battery, so it can be intentional or reckless |
| PCSO or staff victim | Using s.39 or s.89 because they are not a constable | s.3(1)(b) 2018 Act covers those employed or engaged for police purposes. s.89 is for constables and those assisting |
| Emergency worker out of role | Ignoring the requirement of acting in the exercise of functions | s.1(1) needs it, though s.1(3) includes off-duty cases where the person is carrying out such functions |
| Threats to kill | Requiring intent to carry out the threat or that the victim was actually afraid | The intent required is that the recipient would fear it would be carried out. The CPS says the victim's response is evidence, not an element |
| Retreat | Believing there is a duty to retreat | s.76(6A): a factor, not a duty |
| Householder rule everywhere | Applying the grossly disproportionate test to a shop, a street or a s.3 arrest | Only the (8A) householder case. Otherwise disproportionate force is not reasonable |
| Drunk mistake | Letting a drunken mistaken belief support self-defence | s.76(5) bars it |
| Duress for murder | Offering duress as a defence to murder or attempted murder | R v Howe and R v Gotts, per our verified bank |
Six worked questions
Original practice questions from our checked bank (not real or past exam questions). Try each before you read the answer, and check the explanation against your Manuals.
For an assault to amount to actual bodily harm (ABH) rather than common assault, what must the prosecution additionally prove?
ABH under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 requires an injury that interferes with health or comfort: bruising, minor cuts, or even a recognised psychiatric injury can qualify. It does not require intent to cause serious harm (that's closer to the threshold for GBH with intent), a weapon, or hospital treatment.
Source: s.47 Offences against the Person Act 1861; R v Miller [1954] 2 QB 282; R v Chan-Fook [1994] 1 WLR 689
A PCSO is pushed hard in the chest by a man she is moving on from a shop doorway. She is not injured. Which statement about the offence is correct?
Section 3(1)(b) of the 2018 Act covers anyone, other than a constable, who is employed for police purposes, so a PCSO acting in the exercise of her functions is an emergency worker. Section 1 makes common assault or battery of an emergency worker triable either way, with a maximum of 2 years on indictment. The 12-month figure was the original maximum; the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 raised it to 2 years.
Source: Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 ss.1 and 3
Section 71 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 provides that a person's consent to serious harm for the purposes of sexual gratification is not a defence. To which offences does it apply?
Section 71 applies to 'relevant offences', defined as offences under ss.18, 20 and 47 of the 1861 Act, and 'serious harm' means GBH, wounding or ABH. It puts the principle in R v Brown into statute for harm inflicted for sexual gratification. There is a narrow exception for ss.20 and 47 where the harm is infection with a sexually transmitted infection and the victim consented to the sexual activity knowing or believing the defendant had it. Consent can still be a defence to common assault and battery.
Source: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 s.71; R v Brown [1994] 1 AC 212
What is the effect of voluntary intoxication on liability for wounding with intent (s.18) and unlawful wounding (s.20) under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861?
Under the rule in DPP v Majewski (1976), voluntary intoxication may be taken into account on whether the defendant formed a specific intent, such as the intent to cause grievous bodily harm under s.18. It is no defence to a basic intent offence such as s.20, where recklessness is enough. A defendant who is too drunk to form the s.18 intent may still be convicted of s.20, and a drunken intent is still an intent if it was formed.
Source: DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443; Offences Against the Person Act 1861 ss.18 and 20
After drinking heavily, a man punches a stranger who reaches into his pocket for a phone, saying he was sure the stranger was going for a knife. Sober, he would have realised there was no threat. On a charge of assault, can he rely on his mistaken belief for self-defence?
Section 76(4) normally lets a defendant rely on a genuinely held belief about the circumstances, even if mistaken and even if unreasonable. Section 76(5) removes that protection where the mistaken belief is attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication. The first option is the ordinary rule for sober mistakes; it does not apply here.
Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(3) to (5)
A newsagent lives in the flat above her shop, which is connected to the shop by an internal staircase. At 2am she hears an intruder in the shop, goes downstairs and strikes him with a heavy torch, believing he is a burglar. She claims self-defence. Which statement is correct?
Section 76(8B) treats a place of work that is internally accessible from the dwelling of a person who works there, and the internal access between them, as part of the dwelling for householder purposes. In a householder case, force that is grossly disproportionate is never reasonable under s.76(5A); force that is disproportionate but not grossly so may still be reasonable in all the circumstances. The second option is wrong because the gross disproportion limit still applies.
Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(5A), (8A) and (8B)
Map to Blackstone's chapters
Chapter numbers below are from Appendix A of the 2027 candidate handbook (September 2026). They are the same as the 2026 handbook's, except that the 2027 Actus Reus chapter added a sub-heading, so its later sub-headings moved down by one.
| Chapter | Title | Sub-chapters listed | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.10 | Non-fatal Offences Against the Person | 1.10.1 Introduction; 1.10.2 Assault; 1.10.3 Battery; 1.10.4 Assault or Battery?; 1.10.5 Consent; 1.10.6 Assault Offences; 1.10.7 Other Assault Offences; 1.10.8 Threats to Kill; 1.10.9 Strangulation or Suffocation | We could not verify which sub-chapter holds ss.18, 20 and 47, the emergency worker offence or the constable offences, so read the whole chapter |
| 1.4 | General Defences | 1.4.1 Introduction; 1.4.2 Inadvertence and Mistake; 1.4.3 Duress; 1.4.4 Duress of Circumstances; 1.4.5 Use of Lethal Force and Human Rights; 1.4.6 Use of Force to Defend, Prevent Crime and to Arrest; 1.4.7 Police Officers; 1.4.8 Infancy | 1.4.5 is the human rights material: see the use of force section |
| 1.1 | Mens Rea (State of Mind) | 1.1.2 Intent; 1.1.3 Recklessness; 1.1.4 Malice; 1.1.11 Transferred Mens Rea | Underpins every offence in this section, especially s.20 foresight |
| 1.2 | Actus Reus (Criminal Conduct) | 1.2.7 Causal Link or Chain of Causation; 1.2.8 Intervening Act (1.2.6 and 1.2.7 in the 2026 edition) | Useful for harm that follows an assault |
| 1.9 | Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences | Whole chapter | The aggravated versions of assault offences are covered here, and the CPS notes an aggravated form of strangulation |
The handbook says all areas of the syllabus apply to both the sergeants' and inspectors' exams, except chapter 1.8 (Weapons), which is for the sergeants' exam only. Chapters 1.10 and 1.4 are therefore common to both. For the neighbouring Crime material see theft, robbery and burglary, public order offences and misuse of drugs and firearms. For the powers behind lawful arrest, see PACE searches and arrest.
Scenarios to practise on
Illustrative examples, not real incidents, to show how the law above is applied. They are not exam questions.
Revision checklist
- Can you define assault and battery in one sentence each, and say what mens rea both need?
- Can you state, from memory, the maximum for ss.39, 89, 47, 20, 18, 16, 75A and the emergency worker offence?
- Do you know that s.18 is indictable only and the only one of the three harm offences with a life maximum?
- Can you say what a wound is, and what GBH means, in the CPS wording?
- Do you know where the strangulation offence actually lives (s.75A SCA 2015) and which of its limbs can be committed recklessly?
- Can you set out when consent is a defence: battery yes, ss.47, 20, 18 no, s.71 DA Act, s.75A rules?
- Can you list the emergency worker categories and say what PCSOs and NHS staff must show?
- Can you walk through s.76 in order: believed circumstances, mistake, drink, proportionality, retreat, instinct?
- Can you describe a householder case in four conditions and say which defence it covers?
- Do you know which defences duress is not available for?
- Have you checked every figure in this section against the Manuals edition for your sitting?
When this is solid, move on to use of force and human rights.
What we could not verify
- Sub-chapter placement of ss.18, 20 and 47, the s.89 offence and the emergency worker offence. We have not seen the text of the Manuals, so these notes cite chapter 1.10 only for these offences.
- The five year maximum for ss.20 and 47. The current England and Wales text of the 1861 Act does not state it; we derived it from the as-enacted text, the Penal Servitude Act 1891 and the Criminal Justice Act 1948 and it matches the CPS guidance, but a candidate should confirm the figure in the Manuals.
- The list of recognised exceptions to consent for ABH and GBH (such as sport, surgery and similar). The CPS wording refers to a recognised exception without listing them. Read chapter 1.10.
- The full test for duress and duress of circumstances. We rely on Howe, Gotts and Hasan only as stated in our verified practice bank, and BAILII returned an error when we tried to read Hasan.
- Intoxication. Our verified bank cites DPP v Majewski for the specific and basic intent rule, and s.76(5) is verified from legislation.gov.uk. The 2026 chapter list shows no intoxication heading in 1.4, so we do not know which chapter the Manuals use for the general rule.
- Case law beyond the cases named by the CPS and our verified bank. We have not added any other authorities.
- Whether the 2027 Manuals reflect any change in the law between now and the sitting. The College gives notice of law changes it will examine after the Manuals are published.
- Outstanding 2026 Act changes listed on legislation.gov.uk against the 1988 and 2015 Acts. We did not trace each one; none changes the text of the sections we quote.
Misuse of drugs, firearms and weapons
The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the Firearms Act 1968 and chapter 1.8 Weapons, which is on the sergeants' syllabus only.
Drugs, firearms and weapons at a glance
Misuse of drugs (1.6), firearms and gun crime (1.7) and weapons (1.8) are three chapters of the Crime Manual. The statutory wording, section numbers and maximum penalties below were read on legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026, and are current as in force on that date.
| Point | What to know |
|---|---|
| Syllabus chapters (2026 and 2027 editions) | 1.6 Misuse of Drugs, 1.7 Firearms and Gun Crime, 1.8 Weapons. Chapter 1.8 is the sergeants' syllabus only (candidate handbook Appendix A) |
| Possession of a controlled drug | s.5(2) Misuse of Drugs Act 1971; s.5(4) and s.28 say the accused must 'prove' the defence, but R v Lambert reads s.28 as an evidential burden only |
| Possession with intent to supply | s.5(3); applies whether the possession is lawful or not; no fixed quantity |
| Supply, production, cultivation | s.4(3) supply or offer to supply, s.4(2) production, s.6(2) cannabis cultivation |
| Occupiers and managers | s.8: knowingly permitting or suffering production, supply, preparing opium for smoking, or smoking cannabis or opium |
| Search power for drugs | s.23(2) reasonable grounds to suspect: search, detain for search, stop and search vehicle, seize; s.23(3) JP warrant |
| Firearm categories | s.1 certificate firearms, s.2 shot guns, s.5 prohibited weapons (authority from the Secretary of State) |
| Criminal use of firearms | s.16 intent to endanger life, s.16A intent to cause fear of violence, s.17 resisting arrest, s.18 criminal intent, s.19 public place, s.20 trespass |
| Offensive weapon in public | s.1 Prevention of Crime Act 1953: made, adapted or intended for injury; lawful authority or reasonable excuse |
| Blade or point in public | s.139 Criminal Justice Act 1988: no intent needed; defendant proves good reason or lawful authority |
| March 2026 count (one sitting) | 13 of 140 scored questions were under these three skills: drugs 5, firearms 3, weapons 5. Not a forecast |
Chapter 1.8 Weapons: the sergeants' syllabus only
Appendix A of the College's 2026 and 2027 candidate handbooks says all areas of the syllabus apply to both the sergeants' and inspectors' examinations, except chapter 1.8, which is for the sergeants' examination only. That is the rule that decides how much of this section you need. The practical effect is below.
| Candidate | Position | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Sergeants' paper | Chapter 1.8 Weapons is examined | Revise Prevention of Crime Act 1953 s.1, CJA 1988 ss.139 to 141A, and the other 1.8 topics below |
| Inspectors' paper | Chapter 1.8 is not examined (2026 and 2027 handbooks, Appendix A) | Do chapters 1.6 and 1.7 only; the weapons law below is not on your syllabus |
| Where it is stated | Appendix A of the 2026 and 2027 candidate handbooks: 'except chapter 1.8, which is for the sergeants' examination only' | The same wording appears in both editions' handbooks |
| The rule that sets what is tested | The exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting | A weapons rule in the news is examined only if it is in your edition |
In the March 2026 sergeants' breakdown, 5 of the 140 scored questions were under the skill heading Weapons, with subjects including having a bladed or pointed article in a public place, having an offensive weapon in a public place, knives, manufacture and sale of weapons, and trespassing with a weapon of offence. That is a count for one sitting, and the College says the breakdown should not be used to predict other papers. See what comes up in the exam for how the breakdowns work.
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971: classification and offences
Controlled drugs are those in Schedule 2 (s.2). Class A, Class B and Class C mean the substances in Parts I, II and III of that Schedule. The class matters for the penalty, not for whether possession is an offence.
| Class | Where | Examples we checked in Schedule 2 | Maximum on indictment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Class A | Schedule 2 Part I | Cocaine, diamorphine (heroin), and the other substances listed in Part I | Possession 7 years; supply, production and PWITS life |
| Class B | Schedule 2 Part II | Cannabis and cannabis resin, amphetamine, ketamine | Possession 5 years; supply, production and PWITS 14 years |
| Class C | Schedule 2 Part III | Nitrous oxide is listed here, as are certain benzodiazepines | Possession 2 years; supply, production and PWITS 14 years |
| Temporary class drugs | s.2A and s.2(1)(c) | Controlled by a temporary class drug order | s.5(1) and (2) do not apply to a temporary class drug (s.5(2A)); we have not covered the separate regime |
The main offences
| Offence | Section | Elements | Maximum on indictment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Possession | s.5(2) | Have a controlled drug in possession in contravention of s.5(1) | 7 / 5 / 2 years (A / B / C) |
| Possession with intent to supply | s.5(3) | Have a controlled drug in possession, whether lawfully or not, with intent to supply it to another | Life / 14 / 14 years |
| Supplying or offering to supply | s.4(3) | Supply or offer to supply; be concerned in the supplying; be concerned in making an offer. 'Supplying' includes distributing (s.37(1)) | Life / 14 / 14 years |
| Production | s.4(2) | Produce, or be concerned in the production of, a controlled drug | Life / 14 / 14 years |
| Cultivation of cannabis | s.6(2) | Cultivate any plant of the genus Cannabis | 14 years |
| Occupiers | s.8 | Occupier or concerned in management who knowingly permits or suffers a listed activity | 14 years (all classes) |
| Articles for administering or preparing | s.9A | Supply or offer to supply articles believing they will be used to administer or prepare a drug unlawfully. Hypodermic syringes are excluded from s.9A(1) | Summary only: 6 months or level 5 fine |
| Obstruction of s.23 powers | s.23(4) | Intentionally obstruct a person using s.23 powers; conceal documents or drugs; fail to produce books on demand | 2 years on indictment |
- Possession (s.5(2)). Section 5(1) makes it unlawful to have a controlled drug in possession subject to regulations under s.7. Section 5(2) makes it an offence, subject to s.28 and s.5(4).
- PWITS (s.5(3)). There is no weight that turns possession into possession with intent to supply. Quantity, packaging, scales, cash and messages are evidence of intent, none decisive alone.
- Supply (s.4(3)). Supplying or offering to supply, being concerned in the supplying, or being concerned in making an offer. Supplying includes distributing (s.37(1)).
- Psychoactive substances (chapter 1.6.15). The Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 creates separate offences of producing (s.4), supplying or offering to supply (s.5), possessing with intent to supply (s.7), importing or exporting (s.8) and possession in a custodial institution (s.9). The maximum on indictment for ss.4 to 8 is 7 years under s.10, and for s.9 it is 2 years. Mere possession outside a custodial institution is not an offence under that Act.
Drugs: the defences, s.8 and s.23 powers
The defences are where most drugs questions are won or lost. In all of them the statute says the accused must prove it. For s.28, the House of Lords in R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37 said this should be read as an evidential burden only: once the defendant raises evidence of the defence, the prosecution must disprove it. The CPS drug offences guidance states the law that way.
| Section | What the statute says the defendant proves | Point to remember |
|---|---|---|
| s.5(4)(a) | Took possession, knowing or suspecting it to be a controlled drug, to prevent another committing or continuing an offence with it, and as soon as possible took all steps reasonably open to destroy it or deliver it to a person lawfully entitled to take custody | Two limbs. The purpose and the prompt action. The statute says the defendant must prove both |
| s.5(4)(b) | Took possession, knowing or suspecting it to be a controlled drug, to deliver it into the custody of a person lawfully entitled, and as soon as possible took all steps reasonably open to do so | Applies to s.5(2) only, not PWITS under s.5(3) |
| s.28(2) | Neither knew of, nor suspected, nor had reason to suspect the existence of some fact alleged by the prosecution which it is necessary to prove | Applies to ss.4(2) and (3), 5(2) and (3), 6(2) and 9. The statute says 'prove', but under R v Lambert the defendant bears only an evidential burden |
| s.28(3) | Substance proved to be the controlled drug alleged: no acquittal just because he did not know which drug. Acquitted if he proves he neither believed nor suspected nor had reason to suspect it was a controlled drug, or believed it was one he could have had without offence | The mistake-about-which-drug trap |
Occupiers: s.8
An occupier or person concerned in the management of premises commits an offence if they knowingly permit or suffer any of four activities on the premises: producing or attempting to produce a controlled drug; supplying or attempting to supply, or offering to supply; preparing opium for smoking; or smoking cannabis, cannabis resin or prepared opium. The maximum on indictment is 14 years whatever the class. A tenant in her own flat can be an occupier. The list is closed, so knowingly allowing guests to use other drugs is not caught by s.8.
Police powers: s.23
| Power | What it allows | Condition |
|---|---|---|
| s.23(2)(a) | Search the person and detain for the purpose of searching | Reasonable grounds to suspect possession of a controlled drug in contravention of the Act |
| s.23(2)(b) | Search a vehicle or vessel in which the drug may be found; require the person in control to stop it | Constable suspects the drug may be found there |
| s.23(2)(c) | Seize and detain anything found which appears to be evidence of an offence under the Act | Found in the course of the search |
| s.23(3) | JP warrant to enter and search premises and any persons found there; seize drugs or documents | Information on oath of reasonable ground for suspicion; warrant valid for one month; entry by force if need be |
| s.23(4) | Offence to obstruct a person exercising these powers | Intentional obstruction; maximum 2 years on indictment |
Section 23(2) is a power to search a person or a vehicle or vessel. Entry to premises under s.23(3) needs a warrant on information on oath. A question that offers 'enter and search a house under s.23(2) on reasonable suspicion' is wrong. Other entry powers, such as under PACE, are covered on our PACE searches and arrest page.
Firearms Act 1968: definitions and categories
Chapter 1.7 starts with definitions, and most firearms questions turn on them. In section 57, as in force on 4 October 2026, a firearm means a lethal barrelled weapon, a prohibited weapon, or a relevant component part of either. A lethal barrelled weapon is a barrelled weapon of any description from which a shot, bullet or other missile with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle can be discharged (s.57(1B)). Relevant component parts (s.57(1D)) are a barrel, chamber or cylinder; a frame, body or receiver; and a breech block, bolt or other mechanism for containing the pressure of discharge at the rear of a chamber, where capable of being used as part of such a weapon. An airsoft gun within s.57A is not a firearm: it is designed to discharge only a small plastic missile and does not exceed the permitted muzzle energy (2.5 joules, or 1.3 joules if it can fire repeatedly without further trigger pressure).
| Category | Definition and requirement | Offence and maximum |
|---|---|---|
| s.1 firearm | Needs a firearm certificate (s.1(1)). Every firearm except a shot gun within s.1(3)(a) and an air weapon within s.1(3)(b) | Possession, purchase or acquisition without certificate: 5 years on indictment (7 years in the aggravated form, Schedule 6) |
| Shot gun | s.1(3)(a): smooth-bore, not an air gun, barrel at least 24 inches and no bore over 2 inches, no magazine or non-detachable magazine holding no more than 2 cartridges, not a revolver gun. Needs a shot gun certificate (s.2) | s.2(1) without certificate: 5 years on indictment |
| Air weapon | Air rifle, air gun or air pistol that does not fall within s.5(1) and is not declared specially dangerous by rules under s.53. Outside s.1 | Separate regime; not covered here |
| Prohibited weapon | Listed in s.5(1) and (1A). Possession without authority is an offence (s.5(1)); authority means written authority from the Secretary of State in England and Wales (s.5(3)) | s.5(1)(a), (ab), (aba), (ac), (ad), (ae), (af), (ag), (ba) or (c): 10 years; s.5(1)(b): 10 years on indictment; s.5(2A): life |
| Imitation firearm | s.57(4): any thing which has the appearance of being a firearm (other than a s.5(1)(b) weapon), whether or not capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile | Relevant to ss.16A, 17, 18, 19 and 20 |
Section 57(1)(d), the paragraph that treated accessories such as silencers as firearms, was omitted on 29 June 2026 by s.44 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026. The same section inserted a new s.2A: possessing a sound moderator or flash suppressor without a firearm or shot gun certificate, summary only, level 3 fine. The 2026 Manuals were published before that date, and the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.
Prohibited weapons (s.5)
It is an offence to have a prohibited weapon without authority, and authority means written authority from the Secretary of State (s.5(3)). The maximum for possession of most categories is 10 years on indictment, and the section 5(2A) offences of manufacture, sale or transfer have a maximum of life imprisonment. Learn the categories as a list.
| Paragraph | Description |
|---|---|
| s.5(1)(a) | Firearm designed or adapted to discharge two or more missiles successively without repeated pressure on the trigger (automatic) |
| s.5(1)(ab) | Self-loading or pump-action rifled gun, other than one chambered for .22 rim-fire cartridges |
| s.5(1)(aba) | Firearm with a barrel under 30 centimetres, or under 60 centimetres overall, other than certain exceptions, an air weapon, muzzle-loading gun or signalling apparatus |
| s.5(1)(ac) | Self-loading or pump-action smooth-bore gun that is not an air weapon or .22 rim-fire and has a barrel under 24 inches or is under 40 inches overall |
| s.5(1)(ad) | Smooth-bore revolver gun other than one chambered for 9mm rim-fire cartridges or a muzzle-loading gun |
| s.5(1)(ae) | Rocket launcher or mortar for projecting a stabilised missile, other than line-throwing, pyrotechnic or signalling |
| s.5(1)(af) | Air rifle, air gun or air pistol using, or designed or adapted for use with, a self-contained gas cartridge system |
| s.5(1)(b) | Any weapon designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing (this includes pepper and CS sprays) |
| s.5(1)(c) | Cartridge with a bullet designed to explode on or before impact; ammunition containing a noxious thing; certain grenades, bombs and rockets |
| s.5(1A)(a) | Firearm disguised as another object |
In England and Wales, a minimum sentence applies to certain prohibited-weapon offences under s.311 Sentencing Act 2020 and Schedule 20, where the offender was aged 16 or over when the offence was committed. It is 5 years (3 years if the offender was under 18 when the offence was committed) unless there are exceptional circumstances. It applies to s.5(1)(a), (ab), (aba), (ac), (ad), (ae), (af), (ag), (ba) and (c) offences, and to certain other offences listed in Schedule 20, but not to s.5(1)(b) (the noxious-substance category that includes pepper spray). Older material often cites s.51A of the Firearms Act, which now applies in Scotland; for England and Wales use the Sentencing Act 2020.
Firearms: criminal use offences and s.21
Sections 16 to 20 are the offences you will be asked to tell apart. The two questions to ask about each are: is intent needed, and will an imitation do?
| Section | Offence | Imitation or other point | Maximum on indictment |
|---|---|---|---|
| s.16 | Possess a firearm or ammunition with intent to endanger life, or to enable another to do so, whether or not any injury has been caused | Firearm or ammunition only, not an imitation | Life |
| s.16A | Possess a firearm or imitation firearm with intent to cause, or enable another to cause, any person to believe unlawful violence will be used against them or another | Imitation is enough | 10 years |
| s.17(1) | Make or attempt to make any use whatsoever of a firearm or imitation firearm with intent to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of himself or another | Imitation is enough (s.17(4) definition applies) | Life |
| s.17(2) | Possess a firearm or imitation firearm at the time of committing, or being arrested for, a Schedule 1 offence, unless he shows it was for a lawful object | Defendant shows lawful object | Life |
| s.18(1) | Have with him a firearm or imitation firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence, or to resist or prevent arrest, while he has it with him | Imitation is enough; s.18(2) evidential presumption of intending to have it with him | Life |
| s.19 | Without lawful authority or reasonable excuse (the proof whereof lies on him) have with him in a public place a loaded shot gun, an air weapon (loaded or not), any other firearm with suitable ammunition, or an imitation firearm | Public place: s.57(4) | 7 years on indictment, but not for an air weapon (summary only: 6 months or a fine; Schedule 6) |
| s.20(1) and (2) | While he has a firearm or imitation firearm with him, enter or be in a building (or on land) as a trespasser without reasonable excuse (the proof whereof lies on him) | Imitation is enough | Building (s.20(1)): 7 years on indictment, but not for an imitation firearm or an air weapon (summary only). Land (s.20(2)): summary only, 3 months or level 4 fine |
| s.21 | A person barred by sentence from having a firearm or ammunition: life ban for 3 years or more (s.21(1)); 5 years from release for 3 months to under 3 years (s.21(2)); 5 years from the second day after sentence for a suspended sentence of 3 months or more (s.21(2C)). Offence under s.21(4) | Crown Court can lift the bar (s.21(6)) | 5 years on indictment |
Schedule 1 for s.17(2)
| Group | Detail |
|---|---|
| Criminal damage | Offences under s.1 Criminal Damage Act 1971 |
| Person offences | Offences Against the Person Act 1861 ss.20 to 22, 30, 32, 38 and 47 (so s.47 ABH and s.20 are in; common assault is not) |
| Property offences | Theft, robbery, burglary, blackmail and taking a conveyance (Theft Act 1968 s.12(1)) |
| Police | Assaulting a constable in the execution of duty (Police Act 1996 s.89(1); resisting or wilfully obstructing under s.89(2) is not listed), and certain assaults on custody officers |
| Other | Child abduction (Part I Child Abduction Act 1984), and listed Sexual Offences Act 2003 offences |
| Not in Schedule 1 | Common assault, drug supply, drink driving |
Police powers: s.47
Section 47 lets a constable who has reasonable cause to suspect a person of having a firearm in a public place require them to hand it over, search and detain them for that purpose, search a vehicle in a public place and require it to be stopped, and enter any place to exercise those powers. It also covers a person suspected of committing or being about to commit an offence under s.18(1) and (2) or s.20 elsewhere than in a public place. Failure to hand over on demand is an offence under s.47(2). Check the Manuals for how the arrest powers sit with these.
Chapter 1.8 Weapons: PCA 1953 s.1, CJA 1988 s.139, s.139A, s.139AA
Remember: this section is the sergeants' syllabus only. If you are sitting the inspectors paper, the College's 2026 handbook says chapter 1.8 is not examined.
Offensive weapon: s.1 Prevention of Crime Act 1953
It is an offence to have an offensive weapon with you in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, the proof whereof shall lie on the defendant. The maximum on indictment is 4 years. An offensive weapon is an article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by some other person. That gives three categories: made for it (a knuckleduster, say), adapted for it, and intended for it. A household hammer is in the third category only, and the prosecution must prove the intent. Public place includes any highway and any other premises or place to which the public have or are permitted access, whether on payment or otherwise.
Blade or point: s.139 and the education premises offences
| Provision | Content | Point to remember |
|---|---|---|
| s.139(1) to (3) | Have an article with a blade or sharp point in a public place. Folding pocketknives are excluded unless the cutting edge of the blade exceeds 3 inches | No intent needed; public place includes anywhere the public has access, even on payment (s.139(7)) |
| s.139(4) and (5) | Defendant proves good reason or lawful authority; or that he had it for use at work, for religious reasons, or as part of a national costume | Burden on the defendant; no self-protection defence is listed |
| s.139A(1) and (2) | Have a s.139 article, or an offensive weapon within PCA 1953 s.1, on school premises or further education premises | Public place not needed; the education premises is the location |
| s.139A(3) and (4) | Defendant proves good reason or lawful authority; or use at work, educational purposes, religious reasons or national costume | Educational purposes is available only here, not under s.139 |
| s.139AA | Have a s.139 article in a public place, or a s.139 article or offensive weapon on school premises (or further education premises, s.139AA(1A)); unlawfully and intentionally threaten another so that a reasonable person exposed to the same threat would think there was an immediate risk of physical harm | The threatening offence; the 4 year maximum on indictment |
| s.139B | Constable may enter school or further education premises and search the premises and any person on them for a s.139 article or offensive weapon, on reasonable grounds to suspect a s.139A or s.139AA offence is being or has been committed; may seize and retain; may use reasonable force | A power of entry tied to the education premises offences |
The maximum for s.139 on indictment is 4 years. Section 315 of the Sentencing Code provides a minimum sentence for some repeat offenders aged 16 or over convicted of an offence under s.1(1) PCA 1953, s.139(1) or s.139A(1) or (2) (and s.6(1) Offensive Weapons Act 2019); the 2026 Act would add s.139AB once in force. For s.139AA, s.312 of the Sentencing Code makes separate provision about the sentence the court may be required to impose.
The other 1.8 topics
| Provision | Subject | What to know |
|---|---|---|
| PCA 1953 s.1 | Offensive weapon in a public place | Without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, the proof whereof shall lie on the defendant; offensive weapon = made, adapted or intended for injury to the person; 4 years on indictment |
| PCA 1953 s.1A | Threatening with an offensive weapon in public | Have an offensive weapon in a public place, unlawfully and intentionally threaten another with it so that a reasonable person exposed to the same threat would think there was an immediate risk of physical harm; 4 years on indictment; s.312 Sentencing Code applies. Section 139AA covers bladed articles in public, and offensive weapons only on school or further education premises |
| PCA 1953 s.1(3) | Arrest power | Section 1(3) was repealed in England and Wales by PACE; use the PACE arrest powers instead. Do not quote s.1(3) |
| CLA 1977 s.8 | Trespassing with a weapon of offence | On premises as a trespasser, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, having a weapon of offence with him; summary only, 3 months or level 5 fine |
| CJA 1988 s.141(1) | Manufacture, sale or hire, offer for sale or hire, exposing or possessing for sale or hire, lending or giving of a weapon to which s.141 applies | Summary: 6 months or level 5 fine. Section 29 Crime and Policing Act 2026 would make ss.141(1) and (1A) triable either way with 2 years on indictment, but it was not in force on 5 October 2026. Which weapons are covered comes from an order we have not verified (see Not verified) |
| CJA 1988 s.141(1A) | Possession of a weapon covered by s.141 in private (England and Wales) | Summary: 51 weeks, a fine or both. Private means a place other than a public place, school premises, further education premises or a prison (s.141(1C)) |
| OWA 2019 s.6 | Corrosive substance in a public place | Capable of burning human skin by corrosion. In England and Wales the defendant proves good reason, lawful authority or use at work. 4 years on indictment |
| CJA 1988 s.139AB (new) | Possessing a blade or point article or offensive weapon with intent to use unlawful violence etc | Provided for by Crime and Policing Act 2026 s.28; 7 years on indictment. Not in force when we checked on 4 October 2026 (legislation.gov.uk shows it as prospective); not in the 2026 Manuals (see Not verified) |
The traps: reasonable excuse, definitions and lawful authority
Most wrong answers on this topic come from three habits: assuming the prosecution carries a burden the statute puts on the defendant, treating a definition as wider or narrower than it is, and mixing up which phrase a section uses for its defence.
| Trap | Correct position | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Mistake about which drug (s.28) | Believing it is amphetamine when it is cocaine is no defence: the defence is only that you did not believe or suspect it was a controlled drug at all, or believed it was one you could lawfully have | s.28(3) |
| 'Prosecution must disprove' | Under s.139(4) and (5) and PCA s.1 the statute puts the burden of proof on the defendant. Section 28 is different: under R v Lambert the defendant need only raise evidence, and the prosecution must then disprove the defence | Statutory wording; R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37 |
| PWITS needs unlawful possession | It does not. s.5(3) applies 'whether lawfully or not' | s.5(3) |
| s.8 covers all drug use | It lists four activities only. Cocaine use alone is not listed; cannabis smoking is | s.8 |
| s.5(4) 'someday I'll hand it in' | The defence needs both purpose and 'as soon as possible' action | s.5(4)(a) |
| s.23 gives a power of entry | s.23(2) is search of person, vehicle or vessel. Entry to premises needs a warrant under s.23(3) or another power (PACE, covered in the PACE searches page) | s.23(2) and (3) |
| 'Firearm' includes everything | Not for s.16: it needs a real firearm or ammunition. Sections 16A, 17, 18, 19 and 20 take imitations too | ss.16, 16A, 17(4) |
| Imitation must look real and work | An imitation firearm is anything with the appearance of a firearm, whether or not it can discharge a missile | s.57(4) |
| Pepper spray is just a weapon | It is a prohibited weapon under s.5(1)(b); possession needs the Secretary of State's written authority. Self-protection is not authority | s.5(1)(b), s.5(3) |
| Suspended means no ban | A suspended sentence of 3 months or more bars firearms for 5 years from the second day after sentence | s.21(2C) |
| 'Reasonable excuse' means a good reason | Statutes use different phrases: 'lawful authority or reasonable excuse' (PCA s.1, s.19), 'good reason or lawful authority' (s.139). Read which one the stem uses | PCA s.1; s.139(4) |
| A lock knife under 3 inches is legal | A lock knife is not a folding pocketknife for s.139, so the 3 inch rule does not help | s.139(3); R v Deegan |
| Self-protection is a s.139(5) defence | It is not a listed reason; the list is work, religion and national costume | s.139(5) |
| Educational purposes applies to s.139 | It is a specific defence only for the education premises offence in s.139A(4) | s.139A(4) |
| A hammer is an offensive weapon | Only if intended by the person having it for injury to the person (by him or someone else); it is neither made nor adapted for it | PCA s.1(4) |
| s.139AA needs actual harm | It needs a threat that a reasonable person would think created an immediate risk of physical harm. Actual harm is not an element | s.139AA(1) |
'Lawful authority or reasonable excuse' (PCA 1953 s.1 and Firearms Act s.19) is not the same phrase as 'good reason or lawful authority' (s.139). Do not carry the self-protection argument from one to the other. Self-protection is not a listed reason under s.139(5), and for a prohibited weapon under s.5 it is no authority at all.
Worked practice questions
These 6 questions are original practice questions from our verified bank, not real or past exam questions. The correct answer is marked, and the explanation follows. We checked each against legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026.
A man is found with a wrap of white powder which he says he bought believing it was amphetamine. Analysis shows it is cocaine. Charged with possession of a Class A drug, he relies on s.28 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. What is the likely outcome?
Section 28(3)(a) says the accused is not to be acquitted merely because he did not know the substance was the particular controlled drug alleged. He is acquitted only if he proves he did not believe or suspect, and had no reason to suspect, that it was a controlled drug at all, or that he believed it was a controlled drug which he could have possessed without committing an offence. Believing it was amphetamine, a Class B drug, does not help him, because possessing amphetamine is itself an offence.
Source: Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 s.28(2) and (3)
A tenant hosts a party in her flat. She knows that several guests, each using cocaine they brought with them, are snorting it in her bathroom, and she does nothing to stop them. No-one supplies or offers drugs to anyone else in the flat. Is she guilty of an offence under s.8 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971?
Section 8 makes it an offence for an occupier or a person concerned in management to knowingly permit or suffer only the activities it lists: production, supply or offering to supply, preparing opium for smoking, and smoking cannabis, cannabis resin or prepared opium. General use of other controlled drugs, such as snorting cocaine, is not listed. If she knowingly allowed guests to supply cocaine to one another in the flat, s.8(b) would be engaged; a tenant can be an occupier for this purpose.
Source: Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 s.8
Which statement correctly distinguishes s.16 and s.16A Firearms Act 1968?
Section 16A makes it an offence to possess a firearm or imitation firearm with intent to cause, or enable another to cause, any person to believe unlawful violence will be used against them or another. Section 16 refers only to a firearm or ammunition, possessed with intent to endanger life or to enable another person to endanger life, and is committed whether or not any injury has been caused. (Its former reference to serious injury to property was repealed by the Criminal Damage Act 1971.) Neither offence requires a public place; both are possession offences.
Source: Firearms Act 1968 ss.16 and 16A
Three years ago a man received a 4-month prison sentence suspended for 12 months. He completed the suspended period without incident. Officers attending a domestic call find a shotgun in his house. Under s.21 Firearms Act 1968, what is his position?
Section 21(2C) provides that a person given a suspended sentence of imprisonment of three months or more must not have a firearm or ammunition for five years beginning with the second day after sentence is passed. Three years on, he is still within that period, and contravening s.21 is an offence under s.21(4). The lifetime prohibition in s.21(1) applies only to sentences of three years or more.
Source: Firearms Act 1968 s.21(1), (2C) and (4)
Officers search a man in a pub and find a folding knife with a locking blade whose cutting edge is 2.5 inches long. He says it is legal because the blade is under 3 inches. Which statement is correct?
Section 139 applies to any article with a blade or sharp point except a folding pocketknife whose cutting edge is 3 inches or less. The Court of Appeal in R v Deegan (1998) held that a knife whose blade locks open is not a folding pocketknife, so blade length is irrelevant. A pub open to customers is a public place, and the offence does not require any intention to use the knife; he has a defence only if he proves good reason, lawful authority or one of the s.139(5) reasons.
Source: Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139(1) to (3); R v Deegan (1998)
Under s.1 Prevention of Crime Act 1953, when can an ordinary household hammer carried in a public place be an offensive weapon?
An offensive weapon is any article made or adapted for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or someone else. A hammer is neither made nor adapted for injury, so it falls into the third category only if the prosecution proves that intention. Actual use or brandishing is not required; once the weapon is proved, the defendant bears the burden of proving lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
Source: Prevention of Crime Act 1953 s.1(1) and (4)
Map to the Blackstone's chapters
Chapter numbers below are from Appendix A of the College's 2026 candidate handbook (September 2025) and are the same in Appendix A of the 2027 handbook (September 2026).
| Section | Chapter title | Law | On this page |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.6.1 to 1.6.2 | Introduction; Classification | Classes A, B and C, Schedule 2, temporary class drug orders | Class A, B, C table above |
| 1.6.3 | Possession | s.5(1), (2) and (4) | Possession offence and s.5(4) |
| 1.6.4 to 1.6.6 | Supplying; PWITS; Supply of Articles | s.4(3), s.5(3), s.9A | Supply, PWITS, articles |
| 1.6.7 to 1.6.8 | Production; Cultivation of Cannabis | s.4(2), s.6 | Production and cultivation |
| 1.6.9 | General Defence under Section 28 | s.28 | s.28 table and trap |
| 1.6.10 | Occupiers, etc. | s.8 | s.8 list |
| 1.6.11 to 1.6.13 | Assisting or Inducing Offence Outside UK; Incitement; Travel Restriction Orders | Not covered in this section | Chapter text only; Travel restriction orders appeared in the March 2026 breakdown |
| 1.6.14 | Police Powers | s.23 | s.23 table |
| 1.6.15 | Psychoactive and Intoxicating Substances | Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 | Short note below |
| 1.7.2 | Definitions: Firearm, Ammunition, Imitation Firearm | s.57, s.57A | Categories table |
| 1.7.3 to 1.7.4 | Categories of Firearms; Section 1 Firearm | ss.1, 2 | Categories table |
| 1.7.5 | Restrictions on Transfer of Firearms | Not covered in this section | Chapter text only |
| 1.7.6 | Imitation Firearm Offences | ss.16A, 17, 18, 19, 20 | Criminal use table |
| 1.7.7 | Prohibited Weapon | s.5 | Prohibited weapons table |
| 1.7.8 | General Exemptions | Not covered in this section | Chapter text only |
| 1.7.9 to 1.7.10 | Criminal Use of Firearms; Further Firearms Offences | ss.16, 16A, 17, 18, 19, 20 | Criminal use table |
| 1.7.11 | Police Powers | s.47 | Powers note below |
| 1.7.12 | Possession or Acquisition by Convicted Persons | s.21 | s.21 row |
| 1.8.2 to 1.8.3 | Having Offensive Weapon in Public Place; Threatening with Offensive Weapon in Public | PCA 1953 ss.1 and 1A; CJA 1988 s.139AA | Weapons tables |
| 1.8.4 | Having Bladed or Pointed Article in Public Place | CJA 1988 s.139 | Bladed table |
| 1.8.5 | Offences and Powers Relating to School Premises | ss.139A, 139AA, 139B | Bladed table |
| 1.8.6 to 1.8.9 | Trespassing with Weapon; Manufacture and Sale; Possession in Private; Knives | CLA 1977 s.8; CJA 1988 ss.141, 141A | Other weapons table |
Chapter 1.8 is the sergeants' syllabus only. Chapters 1.6 and 1.7 apply to both ranks.
Worked scenarios
Illustrative scenarios, not real cases, to practise applying the law. They are not predictions of any question.
Drugs, firearms and weapons checklist
- Know which chapters apply to your rank: 1.6 and 1.7 for both, 1.8 for sergeants only.
- Can state s.5(2) possession, s.5(3) PWITS, s.4(3) supply and s.8 occupiers in one line each.
- Know the s.5(4) two limbs and what s.28(3) does and does not excuse.
- Know who carries the burden for each defence and which phrase each statute uses.
- Know the three powers in s.23(2) and what needs a warrant under s.23(3).
- Can separate s.1 firearm, shot gun, air weapon, prohibited weapon and imitation firearm.
- Can say which of ss.16, 16A, 17, 18, 19 and 20 accept an imitation firearm.
- Know Schedule 1 offences for s.17(2) and why common assault is not one.
- Know the three s.21 bands, including the suspended sentence rule.
- Can state the three limbs of an offensive weapon under PCA s.1.
- Know the s.139 3 inch rule, Deegan, the defences, and what changes under s.139A.
- Know the elements of s.139AA and the s.139B search power.
- Checked your own Manuals edition for any change in the 1.6, 1.7 or 1.8 text.
When these are secure, move on to use of force and human rights, or go back to the how to pass the sergeants exam guide for the overall plan.
What we could not verify
- How the Manuals present the 2026 law changes. Section 57(1)(d) of the Firearms Act was omitted on 29 June 2026 by the Crime and Policing Act 2026, and s.28 of that Act provides for a new s.139AB in the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which was not in force when we checked. The 2026 Manuals were published before those changes. Under the College's rule, the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.
- Commencement of s.139AB CJA 1988. On 4 October 2026 legislation.gov.uk showed s.28 Crime and Policing Act 2026 as prospective, and s.28 is not in Commencement Regulations Nos. 1 to 3 (SI 2026/689, 939 and 960). We did not search for any later regulations, so check before a sitting whether it has been brought into force.
- Exemptions to the new s.2A Firearms Act. Section 44 of the 2026 Act omitted s.57(1)(d) and inserted s.2A (possession of a sound moderator or flash suppressor without a certificate). We did not read the exemptions amended by Schedule 5 of that Act, so we do not state them.
- The Offensive Weapons Order. Section 141 CJA 1988 depends on an order listing the weapons covered. We have not checked the current list, so we do not list the weapons.
- Nitrous oxide possession rules. We confirmed that nitrous oxide is listed in Schedule 2 Part III (Class C). We did not read the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 provisions on lawful possession, so we have not stated the exemption. Take that from your Manuals.
- Air weapon power limits. Section 1(3)(b) refers to rules under s.53 declaring air weapons specially dangerous. We did not read those rules, so we give no power figures.
- Summary penalties for ss.19 and 20. We state the indictment maxima from Schedule 6 (7 years, not available for an air weapon under s.19 or an imitation firearm or air weapon under s.20(1)) but not every summary variation, for example for the firearms listed in s.5(1)(a) to (ba).
- Summary maximum penalties. Many summary maxima are now set by reference to the general limit in a magistrates' court, so we give indictment maxima in the tables.
- The burden under s.5(4) and the status of Lambert. We rely on the CPS drug offences guidance for the R v Lambert reading of s.28 and did not open the judgment. We did not find a primary source on whether s.5(4) is read the same way, so we give only its statutory wording ('to prove'). Check how your Manual presents both.
- R v Deegan itself. We rely on the holding as recorded in our checked practice question. We did not open the judgment.
- Case law on 'reasonable excuse' and 'intended' for offensive weapons. We state the statutory wording only. We have not used case law because we could not confirm holdings from a primary source that we could open.
- Psychoactive substances detail. We checked the offences in ss.4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 and the 7 year maximum, but not the definitions, exemptions in s.11 or Schedule 1, which are in chapter 1.6.15.
- Anything outside the sections named. Forfeiture, disposal and sentencing guidelines are not covered.
Use of force and human rights
Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967, section 76 CJIA 2008, section 117 PACE, the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Convention rights, and the 2026 Use of Force conduct standard.
Use of force and human rights at a glance
Use of force sits in the Crime Manual under General Defences (1.4.5 to 1.4.7). The Convention rights also appear in General Police Duties chapters (Articles 10 and 11 in 3.8, Article 8 in 3.13, Article 14 in 3.16), and the Use of Force conduct standard is in 3.17. Read this section with non-fatal offences and defences and misconduct regulations and standards. Every statutory section number and quotation below was checked against legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026.
| Point | The rule |
|---|---|
| Domestic test | Force reasonable in the circumstances as the person believed them to be (s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967; s.76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008) |
| Belief | Must be genuinely held; need not be reasonable or correct (s.76(4)); not if the mistake is down to voluntary intoxication (s.76(5)) |
| Proportionality | Disproportionate force is not reasonable (s.76(6)); in a householder case only grossly disproportionate force is not reasonable (s.76(5A)) |
| Retreat | A factor, not a duty (s.76(6A)) |
| PACE | s.117: reasonable force, if necessary, to exercise a PACE power, unless the power needs someone else's consent |
| Article 2 force test | Force 'no more than absolutely necessary' for one of three listed purposes (Article 2(2)) |
| Absolute right to know | Article 3: torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment |
| Qualified rights to know | Articles 8, 10 and 11 (and 9): lawful, listed aim, necessary in a democratic society |
| Public authority duty | s.6(1) HRA 1998 binds the police; claim under s.7(1)(a), one year unless a longer period is equitable (s.7(5)) |
| 2026 change we could verify | The Use of Force Standard of Professional Behaviour was reworded from 30 June 2026 (SI 2026/597). It is a conduct standard, not the criminal law test |
You will often see the test described as force that is reasonable in the circumstances as the officer honestly believed them to be, and no more than necessary. That is a simplified summary. The statute itself uses the word reasonable (s.3(1) CLA 1967) and s.76 then fills in what reasonable means: judged on the circumstances as believed, and not disproportionate (s.76(6)). The phrase 'no more than necessary' is not the wording of s.3 or s.76; necessity appears in s.76(7)(b), which treats honest and instinctive belief in necessity as strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken, and the nearest similar words are 'no more than absolutely necessary' in Article 2(2), a stricter test. If an exam option uses the phrase 'no more than necessary', treat it as loose shorthand, not as a separate statutory test, and prefer the statutory wording.
Where the power to use force comes from
Candidates often blur the sources. Keep them apart, because an exam option that attaches the wrong rule to the wrong source is a common wrong answer.
| Source | What it covers | Nature |
|---|---|---|
| Common law self-defence and defence of property | Judged through s.76 when the question is whether the degree of force was reasonable (s.76(2)(a) and (aa)) | Defence to a criminal charge |
| s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 | Reasonable force to prevent crime or to effect or assist in a lawful arrest | Defence to a criminal charge; replaces the common law on that point (s.3(2)) |
| s.117 PACE 1984 | Reasonable force, if necessary, in exercising a PACE power | A statutory authority attached to the power; not available where consent of a non-police person is required |
| Human Rights Act 1998 and the Convention | Public authorities must not act incompatibly with Convention rights (s.6) | Civil claims and a standard against which police action is judged |
| Standards of Professional Behaviour (Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, Sch. 2) | Use of force standard | Misconduct, a different question from criminal liability |
The last row matters for the exam. Whether an officer is guilty of an offence, whether a Convention right was breached and whether the Use of Force standard of professional behaviour was breached are three different questions, answered under three different regimes. A question that asks which test applies will tell you which question is being asked.
Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967 and section 76 CJIA 2008
Section 3(1) CLA 1967 says a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large. Section 3(2) says this replaces the common law rules on when force used for those purposes is justified. Part I of the 1967 Act does not extend to Scotland or Northern Ireland.
Section 76 CJIA 2008 applies where, in proceedings for an offence, the issue is whether a defendant (D) can rely on a defence in s.76(2) and the question is whether the degree of force used was reasonable in the circumstances. The defences listed are common law self-defence, the common law defence of property, and s.3(1) of the 1967 Act (and its Northern Ireland equivalent). References to self-defence include acting in defence of another person (s.76(10)(b)), and references to the degree of force are to the type and amount of force used (s.76(10)(c)).
The sub-sections worth knowing by number
- s.76(3): reasonableness is decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be.
- s.76(4): whether D's belief was reasonable is relevant only to whether D genuinely held it. If D did genuinely hold it, D can rely on it whether or not it was mistaken, and whether or not any mistake was reasonable.
- s.76(5): D cannot rely on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication.
- s.76(6): outside a householder case, force that was disproportionate in the circumstances as D believed them to be is not to be regarded as reasonable.
- s.76(6A): a possibility of retreat is a factor to be taken into account so far as relevant, rather than a duty to retreat.
- s.76(7): a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action, and evidence that D only did what D honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose is strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken.
Section 76(9) says the section, except where it makes different provision for householder cases, is intended to clarify the operation of the existing defences. It did not create a new test. For the older common law principle that an honest mistake can ground self-defence, the bank question sources point to R v Williams (Gladstone) (1984) 78 Cr App R 276.
An officer who honestly believes a person is about to attack them, and uses force that is not disproportionate to that threat as perceived, is judged on the perceived threat, even if the person turns out to have been unarmed. The same officer who used a baton on someone who had stopped resisting is judged on the circumstances as believed at that point. Hindsight is not the standard, but nor is a belief that was never genuinely held.
Householder cases
Section 76(5A) changes the proportionality limit only in a householder case. Section 76(8A) defines it. All four of these must be present:
- the defence concerned is common law self-defence;
- the force was used by D while in or partly in a building, or part of a building, that is a dwelling or is forces accommodation (or both);
- D was not a trespasser at the time; and
- D believed V to be in, or entering, the building or part as a trespasser.
Section 76(8B) covers a building where part is a dwelling where D lives and another part is a place of work for D or for another person who lives in that dwelling part, internally accessible from it: the place of work and the internal means of access are treated as part of the dwelling. So a newsagent who lives above her shop, with an internal staircase, can be in a householder case when she confronts an intruder in the shop. Vehicles and vessels count as buildings (s.76(8F)).
In a householder case, the question is whether the force was grossly disproportionate in the circumstances as D believed them to be. If it was, it is not reasonable. If it was only disproportionate, it can still be reasonable. The bank question on this topic cites R (Collins) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWHC 33 (Admin) and R v Ray [2017] EWCA Crim 1391 for a two-stage approach: first, whether the force was grossly disproportionate; second, if not, whether it was nonetheless reasonable in all the circumstances.
The householder rule is tied to common law self-defence, to a dwelling or forces accommodation, to a non-trespassing defendant and to a believed trespasser. It does not apply to defence of property, or to the s.3(1) CLA 1967 defence. Do not assume that any force used at home is judged on the lenient limit, and do not assume it makes all lesser force lawful.
Section 117 PACE: reasonable force to exercise a PACE power
Section 117 PACE says that where any provision of the Act confers a power on a constable, and does not provide that the power may only be exercised with the consent of some person other than a police officer, the officer may use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of the power.
- Reasonable and necessary: the section uses both words. Force is not authorised just because a power exists.
- Only PACE powers: the section refers to powers conferred by a provision of that Act. A power in another statute does not carry s.117 with it, so the officer relies on that statute's own words, if any, or on s.3 CLA 1967 and the common law.
- The consent exception: where the power may only be exercised with the consent of someone other than a police officer, s.117 gives no authority for force. Section 62 allows an intimate sample from a person in police detention only if an inspector authorises it and the appropriate consent is given, so force cannot be used to obtain one. A court or jury may draw proper inferences from an unjustified refusal (s.62(10), as the bank question explains).
Section 117 sits alongside, not instead of, s.3 CLA 1967. If an officer uses force to make an arrest, both can be in play. For the arrest and search powers themselves see PACE searches and arrest.
The Human Rights Act 1998 and the police
The Human Rights Act gives effect in UK law to the Convention rights set out in Schedule 1. Section 6(1) makes it unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right. The Act does not list public authorities exhaustively: s.6(3) says the term includes courts and tribunals and any person certain of whose functions are functions of a public nature (s.6(3)(b)). A police force is the standard example of a public authority. An act includes a failure to act (s.6(6)).
Section 7(1)(a) lets a person who is (or would be) a victim of the unlawful act bring proceedings against the authority. Section 7(5) says they must be brought within one year beginning with the date of the act, or a longer period the court or tribunal considers equitable. Candidates are tempted by three or six years, the familiar civil limitation periods, which is why a question on this tends to offer them.
Absolute, limited and qualified rights
The exam asks you to sort the Articles. A workable grouping, based on the text of Schedule 1:
| Article | Nature and limits | Police context |
|---|---|---|
| Article 2: right to life | No balancing paragraph. Article 2(2) lists the only circumstances in which force resulting in death is not a contravention, and requires it to be no more than absolutely necessary | Protects life; also positive obligations (Osman) |
| Article 3: torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Absolute: no second paragraph, no balancing, no public interest justification | Handcuffing, restraint, treatment in custody |
| Article 5: liberty and security | Deprivation of liberty only in the listed cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law (5(1)(a) to (f)); plus rights to be told reasons promptly, to be brought promptly before a judge, and to take proceedings on lawfulness | Arrest, detention, language needs on arrest |
| Article 8: private and family life, home and correspondence | Qualified: interference must be in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society for a listed aim | Searches of homes, surveillance, data |
| Article 10: freedom of expression | Qualified: formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society for a listed aim | Protest messages, speech offences |
| Article 11: peaceful assembly and association | Qualified: restrictions prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society for a listed aim; lawful restrictions on members of the police are expressly allowed | Protests, processions, police unions |
| Article 14: prohibition of discrimination | Secures the enjoyment of the Convention rights without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status | Applied alongside another Article |
Three groups to hold in your head. Absolute: Article 3, with no interference permitted for any aim. Limited: Articles 2 and 5, which list the only circumstances in which interference is allowed, rather than applying a general balancing test. Some texts call Article 2 absolute instead, because nothing outside Article 2(2) can justify force resulting in death, so check how your Manual labels it. Qualified: Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11, where interference must be prescribed by law, pursue a listed aim and be necessary in a democratic society, which in practice means proportionate. For Articles 10 and 11 the bank question cites the structured test in Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2) [2013] UKSC 39: is the objective sufficiently important, is the measure rationally connected to it, could a less intrusive measure be used, and has a fair balance been struck. The merits of the protesters' cause are not part of the test.
Note the Article 11(2) final sentence: the Article does not prevent lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State. Article 11 is qualified anyway by the first sentence of Article 11(2); this sentence adds that restrictions on the police are expressly allowed, which is why a constable cannot claim an unrestricted right to join any trade union (see also s.64 Police Act 1996).
Article 2 and the lethal force test
Article 2(1) says everyone's right to life is protected by law. Article 2(2) says deprivation of life is not regarded as inflicted in contravention of the Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
- in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
- in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; or
- in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.
Compare this with the domestic test. Section 3 CLA 1967 and s.76 ask whether force was reasonable in the circumstances as believed. Article 2(2) uses the phrase 'no more than absolutely necessary', which is a stricter wording, and the purposes are listed. Preventing crime in general is not one of them. That is the single most examinable difference: do not choose 'reasonable in the circumstances' or 'proportionate to a legitimate aim' when the question is about the Article 2(2) wording.
The domestic criminal test turns on honest belief (s.76(3) and (4)). Article 2(2) does not mention the officer's belief in its text. How honest belief interacts with 'absolutely necessary' is a matter of case law that the Blackstone's chapter 1.4.5 (Use of Lethal Force and Human Rights) covers and that we have not reproduced. Read that chapter for the exam position, and do not assume the two tests are identical.
Articles 3, 5, 8, 10, 11 and 14 as they apply to police work
Article 3
No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. There is no second paragraph, so no balancing exercise can make such treatment lawful, even where the aim seems compelling.
Article 5
Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. Deprivation of liberty is allowed only in the cases listed in Article 5(1) and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law. The case an arresting officer relies on most is Article 5(1)(c): lawful arrest or detention, for the purpose of bringing the person before the competent legal authority, on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence, or when reasonably considered necessary to prevent an offence or flight after one. Article 5(2) requires that an arrested person be informed promptly, in a language they understand, of the reasons for the arrest and of any charge. Article 5(3) requires a person arrested under 5(1)(c) to be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power. Article 5(4) gives anyone deprived of liberty by arrest or detention the right to take proceedings to challenge its lawfulness. The bank question on a man who does not understand English tests Article 5(2). See also PACE Code C detention and interviews.
Article 8
Everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, home and correspondence. Interference is permitted only if in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. A bank question asks you to spot the aim that is NOT in this list, so learn the list. Blackstone's covers this at chapter 3.13.2.
Articles 10 and 11
Article 10 protects freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority. Article 11 protects freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions. Both are qualified. The key word in Article 11 is 'peaceful': an assembly whose organisers intend violence falls outside its protection, and failing to give notice of a procession does not of itself remove Convention protection (though it may be an offence for the organiser). Blackstone's chapters 3.8.2 and 3.8.3 cover these, and the sibling page on public order offences applies them to protest policing.
Article 14
The enjoyment of the Convention rights and freedoms must be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status. The Article speaks of the enjoyment of the rights set out in the Convention, so treat it as working alongside the other Articles. The exam point is to read the list, including 'other status', and to learn Blackstone's chapter 3.16.2 for the detail.
Positive obligations
A common error is to read Article 2 as a restraint only. It also imposes positive obligations on the state. The operational duty in Osman v United Kingdom (1998), which the bank question on a threatened woman relies on, arises where the authorities know or ought to know of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual from the criminal acts of a third party. They must then take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might be expected to avoid that risk.
- Not a guarantee: the duty does not require the impossible or an unreasonable burden.
- Not limited to the police stopping themselves: it can require action against a third party's threat.
- No charge needed: the duty does not wait until the person threatening is charged.
For a sergeant, the practical reading is that a credible, specific, imminent threat to an identified person calls for documented, proportionate steps within your powers, not just a note on a log. Other Articles also carry positive elements. We have not verified the full scope of those from a primary source in this section, so check Blackstone's 1.4.5 and your Manuals.
Police officers' own position
Blackstone's 2026 chapter list has a separate section, 1.4.7 'Police Officers', under General Defences. We have not read that chapter, so we do not summarise its content here. What we can verify from legislation:
- Section 3(1) CLA 1967 applies to any person, not only to officers, and covers prevention of crime and lawful arrest.
- Section 76 applies to anyone relying on the listed defences in proceedings for an offence.
- Section 117 PACE is the specific statutory authority for a constable exercising a PACE power.
- The Human Rights Act binds the force as a public authority (s.6).
- The Standards of Professional Behaviour contain a Use of Force standard that applies to police officers (see next section).
The next section looks at the same ground from the supervisor's point of view.
The legal test from a supervisor's point of view
Whether force used by an officer was lawful as a matter of criminal law comes down to one question: was the force reasonable in the circumstances as the officer honestly believed them to be. It has two parts worth separating, honest belief and proportionate, reasonable force, because promotion-level questions often test whether you can apply both to an unfamiliar scenario rather than recite a phrase.
Why hindsight never enters the test
The test is fixed to the moment of decision, not to what a calm assessment afterwards shows was actually true. Under s.76(4), if the officer genuinely held a belief about the circumstances, they can rely on it whether or not it was mistaken and whether or not the mistake was a reasonable one, so an honest but mistaken belief that they were about to be attacked is judged as if it were true. The two limits are the intoxication rule (s.76(5)) and proportionality in the circumstances as believed (s.76(6)).
Same standard, every tactic
A common misconception is that certain tactics, such as a Taser (a conducted energy device), a baton strike or restraint techniques, are governed by their own legal standard. They are not. Every use of force option is assessed against the same reasonableness test in s.3 CLA 1967 and s.76 CJIA 2008. What differs between tactics is the tactical and medical guidance on when and how to use each one safely, not the legal threshold for whether using it was lawful.
Why it matters more at sergeant and inspector rank
As a sergeant or inspector you are more often the person reviewing a use of force report after the event, briefing a team before a planned operation involving force, or giving evidence about whether a tactic was properly authorised. Knowing the test precisely, including which test is being applied (the criminal law test or the conduct standard in the next section), lets you assess a colleague's use of force fairly rather than substituting your own hindsight for their honest judgement at the time.
The 2026 changes: what we could verify
You may have heard that the legal test for police use of force changed in 2025 or 2026. We checked legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026 and found the following. Treat anything beyond this table as unverified.
| Area | Provision | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Criminal law test | s.3 CLA 1967 and s.76 CJIA 2008 | No police-specific amendment found on legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026 |
| Misconduct standard | Schedule 2, Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, Use of Force | Reworded from 30 June 2026 by SI 2026/597; does not apply to pre-commencement allegations (regulation 3) |
| Anonymity for firearms officers | Crime and Policing Act 2026, ss.200 to 203 | Anonymity and reporting restrictions for authorised firearms officers charged with a qualifying offence; shown as in force from 29 June 2026 |
| Article 2 | Human Rights Act 1998 Sch. 1 | Text unchanged: 'no more than absolutely necessary' |
The conduct standard
The Police (Conduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/597) were made on 4 June 2026 and came into force on 30 June 2026, extending to England and Wales. They replace the use of force paragraph in Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. The text as originally made read: 'Police officers only use force to the extent that it is necessary, proportionate and reasonable in all the circumstances.' The substituted text reads: 'Police officers only use force when they honestly believe this to be necessary. The force used should be necessary, proportionate and reasonable.'
Regulation 3 says the amendment does not have effect for a pre-commencement allegation, or for an allegation that relates to a matter in respect of which a pre-commencement allegation has been made and that comes to attention on or after 30 June 2026 while the earlier allegation is still being handled under the old rules.
This is a change to the standard against which conduct is judged in misconduct proceedings. It is not an amendment to s.3 CLA 1967, s.76 CJIA 2008 or Article 2. A question about whether an officer committed an assault is still decided under the criminal law test above. A question about misconduct for use of force is decided under the Standards of Professional Behaviour, which now start from honest belief in necessity. See misconduct regulations and standards.
Whether the Blackstone's Manuals edition set for your sitting reflects the June 2026 change is something we could not check. The College says the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals for the sitting and examines later changes only where it gives notice, so read the notice in the handbook for your sitting.
Separately, the Crime and Policing Act 2026 added anonymity and reporting restrictions for authorised firearms officers charged with a qualifying offence (ss.200 to 203, shown as in force from 29 June 2026). A qualifying offence in s.200(2) is one alleged to have been committed by D acting as an authorised firearms officer, involving the use of a lethal barrelled weapon to discharge a conventional round, where D was authorised to use that weapon with that round. That is a procedural protection after a charge, not a change to when force is lawful.
The traps
| Trap | What is actually right |
|---|---|
| Treating the belief as needing to be reasonable | Only genuine belief is needed (s.76(4)); reasonableness goes to whether it was genuine. Voluntary intoxication is the exception (s.76(5)) |
| Using 'reasonable' for Article 2 | Article 2(2) says 'no more than absolutely necessary', for one of three listed purposes. Preventing crime generally is not listed |
| Duty to retreat | There is none. It is a factor taken into account so far as relevant (s.76(6A)) |
| 'Grossly disproportionate' everywhere | Only in a householder case (s.76(5A)). Elsewhere disproportionate force is not reasonable (s.76(6)) |
| Assuming any home is a householder case | All four limbs of s.76(8A) must be met, and it is limited to common law self-defence |
| s.117 for every power | Only for PACE powers, and not where consent of a non-police person is needed, such as an intimate sample |
| Calling Article 11 absolute | It is qualified, and Article 11(2) allows lawful restrictions on the police |
| Calling Article 2 'qualified like Article 8' | It has no balancing paragraph; Article 2(2) lists the only permitted circumstances and demands absolute necessity |
| Three or six years for HRA claims | One year from the act, or longer if the court considers it equitable (s.7(5)) |
| Mixing conduct and criminal tests | The Use of Force Standard of Professional Behaviour is a separate test from s.3 and s.76 |
Worked questions from our verified bank
These 6 are original practice questions from our checked bank, not real or past exam questions. Attempt each before reading the marked answer, and check the explanation against your Manuals.
Article 2(2) of the Convention permits a deprivation of life resulting from the use of force only where that force was no more than what?
Article 2(2) allows force resulting in death only where it is no more than absolutely necessary in defence of any person from unlawful violence, to effect a lawful arrest or prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained, or in action lawfully taken to quell a riot or insurrection. This is a stricter test than the domestic 'reasonable force' test in s.3 Criminal Law Act 1967. Preventing crime in general is not one of the listed purposes.
Source: Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1, Article 2(2)
Which of the following Convention rights, given effect by the Human Rights Act 1998, is an absolute right that cannot be justified by any public interest, however serious?
Article 3 is an absolute right: there is no second paragraph allowing interference, and no balancing exercise can make torture or inhuman or degrading treatment lawful, even to obtain information that might save a life. Articles 8, 10 and 11 are qualified rights, each with a second paragraph allowing interference that is lawful, pursues a listed aim and is necessary in a democratic society.
Source: Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1, Articles 3, 8, 10 and 11
A woman tells your team that her ex-partner, recently released from prison, has sent messages saying he will kill her this weekend and has been seen near her address with a knife. As the duty sergeant, you consider the force's obligations under Article 2. Which statement best describes the positive obligation that may arise?
Article 2 imposes a positive operational duty, set out in Osman v United Kingdom (1998), where the authorities knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual from the criminal acts of a third party and failed to take reasonable measures within their powers to avoid it. It is not a guarantee of safety and does not impose an impossible or disproportionate burden, but nor is it limited to the police refraining from taking life. A charge is not a precondition.
Source: Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1, Article 2; Osman v United Kingdom (1998)
A constable is confronted by an aggressive man in a narrow alley. She could have stepped back through a doorway but instead used her baton to defend herself. Reviewing the incident, a colleague says her failure to retreat makes the force automatically unlawful. Under s.76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, how is the possibility of retreat treated?
Section 76(6A) provides that a possibility that the person could have retreated is to be considered, so far as relevant, as a factor in deciding whether the force was reasonable, rather than as giving rise to a duty to retreat. It is therefore neither a duty nor irrelevant. The 'grossly disproportionate' wording applies only to householder cases under s.76(5A), and even there it describes force that cannot be reasonable.
Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(5A), (6) and (6A)
A suspect in police detention is suspected of a sexual offence. An inspector has authorised the taking of an intimate sample, but the suspect refuses to consent. An officer asks whether s.117 PACE allows reasonable force to be used to take the sample. What is the correct answer?
Section 117 PACE allows reasonable force, if necessary, only where a provision confers a power on a constable and does not provide that it may only be exercised with the consent of some person other than a police officer. Section 62 requires both inspector authorisation and the appropriate consent for an intimate sample, so force cannot be used. Under s.62(10), a court or jury may draw such inferences as appear proper from a refusal without good cause.
Source: PACE 1984 ss.62(1) and (10) and 117
A newsagent lives in the flat above her shop, which is connected to the shop by an internal staircase. At 2am she hears an intruder in the shop, goes downstairs and strikes him with a heavy torch, believing he is a burglar. She claims self-defence. Which statement is correct?
Section 76(8B) treats a place of work that is internally accessible from the dwelling of a person who works there, and the internal access between them, as part of the dwelling for householder purposes. In a householder case, force that is grossly disproportionate is never reasonable under s.76(5A); force that is disproportionate but not grossly so may still be reasonable in all the circumstances. The second option is wrong because the gross disproportion limit still applies.
Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76(5A), (8A) and (8B)
Blackstone's chapter map
These chapter numbers and titles are in Appendix A of both the 2026 candidate handbook (September 2025) and the 2027 handbook (September 2026).
| Chapter | Title | Use it for |
|---|---|---|
| 1.4.5 | Use of Lethal Force and Human Rights | Article 2 and lethal force; read with the Article 2 section above |
| 1.4.6 | Use of Force to Defend, Prevent Crime and to Arrest | s.3 CLA 1967, s.76 CJIA 2008, common law self-defence, householder cases |
| 1.4.7 | Police Officers | The position of police officers specifically. We have not seen this chapter's text, so use it to check how it treats officers' use of force |
| 3.8.2 | Article 10: Freedom of expression | Qualified right; protests and speech |
| 3.8.3 | Article 11: Freedom of Assembly and Association | Peaceful assembly; police restrictions |
| 3.13.2 | Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Home and Correspondence | Qualified right; search, surveillance, information |
| 3.16.2 | Article 14: Prohibition of Discrimination | Linked to the other Convention rights |
| 3.17.2 | The Standards of Professional Behaviour | Where the Use of Force standard sits; see the 2026 changes section |
Scenarios
These are invented illustrations, not real incidents. They show how to work through the tests.
Checklist before the exam
- I can state s.3(1) CLA 1967 and say what s.76 adds, by sub-section number.
- I know honest belief need not be reasonable, and the intoxication exception.
- I can distinguish disproportionate (s.76(6)) from grossly disproportionate (s.76(5A)) and list the four limbs of a householder case.
- I know retreat is a factor, not a duty.
- I can state s.117 PACE and give the consent exception with an example.
- I can sort the Articles into absolute, limited and qualified, and recite the three Article 2(2) purposes.
- I know the Osman duty and what it does not require.
- I know that the Use of Force standard of professional behaviour changed on 30 June 2026 and that it is a separate test.
- I have checked the Blackstone's contents page for the edition I am sitting, and the College notice for my sitting.
For the next step, see the evidence and procedure syllabus notes or how to pass the sergeants exam.
Not verified
- We have not read Blackstone's chapters 1.4.5, 1.4.6, 1.4.7, 3.8.2, 3.8.3, 3.13.2 or 3.16.2. Their content, and what they emphasise, may differ from this section. We took the titles from Appendix A of the College's 2026 and 2027 handbooks.
- We did not verify the case law on how honest belief interacts with the 'absolutely necessary' test in Article 2, or the duty to investigate deaths. Check chapter 1.4.5.
- We did not verify the scope of positive obligations under Articles other than Article 2.
- We did not verify whether the Government or the College has announced any further change to the legal test for use of force beyond SI 2026/597 and the firearms officer anonymity provisions. We found none on legislation.gov.uk, but absence there is not proof that none is planned, and statutory guidance is not on legislation.gov.uk.
- We did not verify whether the 2026 Manuals reflect SI 2026/597, or whether the College has given notice that it will be examined.
- We did not check police firearms or Taser guidance, such as College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice, because those pages were not reachable.
- The cases named here (Williams (Gladstone), Collins, Ray, Osman, Bank Mellat) are taken from the cited sources of our verified bank questions; we did not independently read the judgments.
Practise Crime questions under time
Reading notes is not the same as answering questions at the paper's pace. Try the free mini mock first; our toolkit (we make it, so weigh that accordingly) has the full checked question bank, including the Crime questions above, with timed sittings and progress tracking. Neither replaces the Manuals, which are the syllabus.
Next area: the evidence and procedure syllabus notes, then the general police duties syllabus notes and the road policing syllabus notes. For a timetable, see the sergeant exam revision plan.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which chapters are in the Crime area of the sergeants exam?
Volume 1 of the 2027 Blackstone's Police Manuals, Crime, has 17 chapters (1.1 to 1.17) according to Appendix A of the College's 2027 candidate handbook: from mens rea and actus reus through general defences, homicide, drugs, firearms, weapons, assaults, sexual offences and child protection to theft, fraud and criminal damage. The exam draws questions only from the Manuals edition for the sitting.
Is the Crime syllabus the same for the inspectors exam?
Yes, except one chapter. Appendix A of the 2026 and 2027 candidate handbooks says all areas of the syllabus apply to both the sergeants' and inspectors' exams, except chapter 1.8 (Weapons), which is for the sergeants' exam only.
Did the Crime chapter numbers change between the 2026 and 2027 Manuals?
Partly. The 2027 Crime volume has 17 chapters, not 16: 'Sexual Offences Against Children and People with a Mental Disorder' is now 1.13, so child protection moved to 1.14, theft and related offences from 1.14 to 1.15, fraud from 1.15 to 1.16 and criminal damage from 1.16 to 1.17. Chapters 1.1 to 1.12 keep their numbers, though the Actus Reus chapter gained a sub-heading.
What is the difference between theft and robbery?
Robbery under s.8 Theft Act 1968 is theft plus force. The defendant must steal and, immediately before or at the time of doing so and in order to do so, use force on any person or put or seek to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force. Without the force or the threat of immediate force, the offence is theft, whatever the value and whether or not a weapon was present.
Does a threat of future violence make a taking a robbery?
No. Section 8(1) requires fear of being then and there subjected to force. A demand for property backed by a threat to beat someone up next week fails that test, so it is not robbery. Theft and blackmail should be considered instead, because consent obtained by threats does not stop the taking being an appropriation, and a demand with menaces can be blackmail.
When must the intent for burglary exist?
It depends on which form of burglary you are looking at. Under s.9(1)(a) the intent to steal, inflict grievous bodily harm or do unlawful damage must exist when the defendant enters as a trespasser. Under s.9(1)(b) no intent at entry is needed: the offence is committed if, having entered as a trespasser, the defendant steals or attempts to steal, or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm.
Is criminal damage inside a building burglary?
Only under s.9(1)(a), and only if the intent to do unlawful damage existed on entry. Section 9(1)(b) covers stealing and grievous bodily harm after entry but not damage. A trespasser who forms the intent to smash things only after getting inside has committed criminal damage, not burglary. This is a favourite trap because the two subsections look alike.
When does burglary become aggravated burglary?
Section 10 applies when a person commits any burglary and at the time has with him a firearm or imitation firearm, a weapon of offence or an explosive. For a s.9(1)(a) burglary the relevant time is entry. For a s.9(1)(b) burglary it is the time of the stealing or the grievous bodily harm, so a burglar who picks up a knife inside the house and still has it with him when he steals can commit the aggravated offence. The maximum is life imprisonment.
Can a customer in a shop be a burglar?
Yes, in principle. Section 9 applies to a building or part of a building, and a person who has permission to be in one part of a building is a trespasser if he enters a part that he is not permitted to enter. The Court of Appeal in R v Walkington treated the area behind a shop counter as a separate part. If he entered it intending to steal, burglary under s.9(1)(a) is complete on entry, even if the till is empty.
Does intending to give property back stop it being theft?
Not necessarily. Section 6(1) treats a person as intending to permanently deprive if he intends to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the owner's rights. Taking banknotes with a plan to replace them with equivalent money was held in R v Velumyl to be an intention to permanently deprive. A borrowing counts only if it is for a period and in circumstances equivalent to an outright taking. Willingness to pay does not by itself stop an appropriation being dishonest (s.2(2)).
Is taking a car without consent theft?
Usually not, because the person taking it for a joyride often has no intention to permanently deprive. Taking a conveyance without consent under s.12(1) is a separate offence that does not require that intention. It is a summary only offence, with a maximum of six months, a level 5 fine or both. If the vehicle was driven or damaged in one of the ways listed in s.12A(2), aggravated vehicle-taking can be charged, with a maximum of two years or fourteen years if an accident caused a death.
Can you be guilty of handling goods obtained by fraud?
Yes. Section 24(4) Theft Act 1968 says goods obtained in England and Wales or elsewhere by blackmail or by fraud within the meaning of the Fraud Act 2006 are regarded as stolen. So someone who knowingly keeps a television that her brother obtained using another person's card details can be charged with handling. Remember also that goods stop being stolen once restored to the owner or to other lawful possession or custody, which can include police custody (s.24(3) and verified question crime-b-10).
What is going equipped and when does it apply?
Under s.25 a person who, when not at his place of abode, has with him any article for use in the course of or in connection with any burglary or theft is guilty of going equipped. The maximum is three years on indictment. Proof that the article was made or adapted for burglary or theft is evidence of the intended use, but ordinary articles such as a screwdriver are covered if they are intended for that use. By s.25(5) an offence of taking a conveyance under s.12(1) is treated as theft for this purpose.
Is a demand for money you are genuinely owed blackmail?
It can be. A demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it believes both that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand and that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing it. A genuine debt answers only the first belief. Threatening to expose someone's private life to force payment may well fail the second, because the question is whether he actually believed the menaces were a proper means. Gain includes getting what one has not, which can cover money owed (s.34(2)(a)), and menaces are not limited to threats of violence.
Does the exam test the Fraud Act 2006 as part of this topic?
The College's March 2026 subject breakdown lists fraud as its own skill within Crime, separate from theft and related offences, and the Manual has it as chapter 1.15 in the 2026 edition. For this page we cover only ss.1 to 5 and the connected articles offences briefly, because a fraud offence is often the alternative charge to consider beside a Theft Act one. The exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.
Is the new power to search for electronically tracked stolen goods examinable?
We cannot say. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 section 171 inserts new ss.26A to 26C into the Theft Act 1968 (a power for an inspector to authorise warrantless search where tracking data shows stolen items on premises). On legislation.gov.uk on 4 October 2026 it is shown as prospective (not in force at Royal Assent), and none of the three commencement regulations made so far under the Act (SI 2026/689, 2026/939 and 2026/960) mentions s.171. The exam tests the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting, so check whether your edition mentions it.
What is the difference between assault and battery?
In the CPS charging guidance, common assault is an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence, and battery is the intentional or reckless application of unlawful force to another person. Both are summary only under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988, with a maximum of six months. Where battery is charged it is usually put as assault by beating. The exam wants you to keep the two apart: fear of force is an assault, actual force is a battery.
What must be proved for assault occasioning actual bodily harm?
An assault or battery, plus actual bodily harm caused by it, contrary to s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The CPS guidance says harm need not be permanent but must be more than transient and trifling, and that a recognised psychiatric illness can count, supported by medical evidence, while psychological upset short of that does not. No intent to cause the harm is needed, only the intent or recklessness that goes with the assault. The maximum is five years and the offence is triable either way.
What is the difference between s.18 and s.20?
Both involve wounding or grievous bodily harm, and the difference is the state of mind. Section 18 needs intent to do grievous bodily harm (or intent to resist or prevent a lawful apprehension), is indictable only and carries life. Section 20 is wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm, where the CPS guidance (citing R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter) says the defendant must intend or foresee that some harm might result, with a maximum of five years. Wounding needs a break in the continuity of the skin.
Is it an offence to strangle someone if they agree to it?
Section 75A(2) Serious Crime Act 2015 gives a defence if the defendant shows the other person consented, but s.75A(3) takes it away if the person suffers serious harm and the defendant intended that harm or was reckless as to it. Serious harm means GBH, wounding or ABH. Section 75A(4) says the defendant is taken to have shown consent if enough evidence is adduced to raise the issue and the prosecution does not disprove it beyond reasonable doubt. Separately, s.71 Domestic Abuse Act 2021 removes consent as a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47 where serious harm is inflicted for sexual gratification.
Is the strangulation offence in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021?
Section 70 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 inserted the offence into the Serious Crime Act 2015 as s.75A, so you should cite it as s.75A Serious Crime Act 2015 (inserted by s.70 DA Act 2021). It has been in force since 7 June 2022, applies to everyone and not only to domestic abuse cases, and is not retrospective. The maximum on indictment is five years. If a question gives you the section number of the Serious Crime Act, use it.
Does a threat to kill have to be a threat to the person who hears it?
No. Section 16 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 covers a threat to kill that other person or a third person. The key element is the intention: the defendant must intend that the person receiving the threat would fear it would be carried out. It does not matter whether the defendant meant to carry it out, and the maximum is ten years. The offence needs the absence of a lawful excuse.
Who counts as an emergency worker under the 2018 Act?
Section 3(1) Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 lists constables; people with the powers of a constable or otherwise employed or engaged for police purposes (which covers PCSOs and police staff); National Crime Agency officers; prison officers and certain custody and escort staff; fire and rescue personnel; search and rescue personnel; and NHS health service workers whose general activities involve face to face interaction with patients or the public. It does not matter whether the person is paid or unpaid. The victim must have been acting in the exercise of their functions, which includes some off-duty situations under s.1(3).
What is the maximum penalty for assaulting an emergency worker?
For common assault or battery against an emergency worker acting in the exercise of their functions, s.1(2) of the 2018 Act gives up to two years on indictment (raised from 12 months by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 for offences from 28 June 2022, per the revised text). On summary conviction the limit is the general limit in a magistrates' court. Plain battery under s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 is capped at six months, which is why the emergency worker version is the one to look for in a question about a PCSO, nurse or paramedic.
What is the householder rule?
In a householder case, s.76(5A) says the force is not to be regarded as reasonable if it was grossly disproportionate in the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. In any other case, s.76(6) says force is not reasonable if it was merely disproportionate. A householder case needs the common law defence of self-defence, force used in or partly in a dwelling or forces accommodation, a defendant who is not a trespasser, and a belief that the victim was in or entering as a trespasser. A workplace internally accessible from the dwelling can be treated as part of it under s.76(8B).
Can a drunken mistake support self-defence?
Not under s.76. Section 76(4) lets a defendant rely on a genuinely held belief about the circumstances even if it was mistaken and unreasonable, but s.76(5) says that does not allow reliance on a mistaken belief attributable to voluntarily induced intoxication. The reasonableness of the belief is still relevant to whether it was genuinely held. Do not mix this up with the Majewski rule on specific and basic intent, which is about the mental element of the offence.
Is duress a defence to wounding with intent?
Our verified practice bank treats duress by threats as available in principle to s.18, and not available to murder (R v Howe) or attempted murder (R v Gotts). It also records R v Hasan: duress is unavailable to a person who voluntarily associated with others he foresaw, or ought reasonably to have foreseen, might compel him by threats of violence. The full tests are in Blackstone's chapter 1.4 (the 2026 list has headings for duress and duress of circumstances), which we have not reproduced here.
Can I use s.3 Criminal Law Act 1967 as a private citizen?
Yes. Section 3(1) says a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large. It is not limited to constables. Section 76 of the 2008 Act applies to the s.3(1) defences as well as to common law self-defence, so the reasonableness of the force is judged on the circumstances as the person believed them to be.
How many questions on this topic came up in the March 2026 sergeants paper?
In the College's March 2026 sergeants' subject area breakdown, we counted six scored rows under Non-fatal offences against the person (assault offences twice, consent, other assault offences, strangulation or suffocation, and threats to kill) and two under General defences (duress, and inadvertence and mistake). That is a count of that one sitting only. The College says the breakdown is not valid for predicting other papers, and the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting.
Is chapter 1.8 (Weapons) on the inspectors exam?
No. The College's 2026 candidate handbook, in Appendix A, says all areas of the syllabus apply to both the sergeants and inspectors examinations except chapter 1.8, which is for the sergeants' examination only. If you are sitting the inspectors paper you can skip 1.8, but chapters 1.6 (Misuse of Drugs) and 1.7 (Firearms and Gun Crime) still apply to you. Check the 2027 handbook if you sit in 2027, because we could not open its Appendix A.
What is the difference between possession and possession with intent to supply?
Simple possession is s.5(2) Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and possession with intent to supply is s.5(3). The extra element is the intent to supply it to another, and there is no fixed quantity that creates it: intent is inferred from the whole picture such as quantity, packaging, scales, cash and messages. Section 5(3) applies whether the possession is lawful or not, which matters for someone holding drugs lawfully, such as a prescription holder, who intends to pass them on.
Does s.28 help someone who thought a drug was a different drug?
Usually not. Section 28(3)(a) says a person is not acquitted merely because they did not know or suspect that the substance was the particular drug alleged. They are acquitted only if they prove they neither believed nor suspected nor had reason to suspect it was a controlled drug at all, or that they believed it was a controlled drug that they could have had without committing an offence. Believing it was amphetamine does not qualify, because possessing amphetamine is itself an offence.
Who has the burden of proof under s.5(4) and s.28?
Both sections say it is a defence for the accused 'to prove' the facts. For s.28, though, the House of Lords in R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37 said it should be read as placing only an evidential burden on the defendant: he must raise evidence of the defence, and the prosecution must then disprove it to the criminal standard. The CPS drug offences guidance states the law that way. We have not verified whether the same reading applies to s.5(4), so check how your Manual treats it. The weapons offences use different phrases, so check each one separately.
Can an occupier be guilty under s.8 if guests use cocaine in their flat?
Not for the use alone. Section 8 lists only four activities: producing or attempting to produce a controlled drug, supplying or offering to supply it, preparing opium for smoking, and smoking cannabis, cannabis resin or prepared opium. Knowingly allowing guests to snort cocaine is not on the list, although knowingly allowing guests to supply cocaine to each other would be under s.8(b).
What powers does s.23 Misuse of Drugs Act give a constable?
If a constable has reasonable grounds to suspect a person has a controlled drug in contravention of the Act, s.23(2) allows them to search that person and detain them for the search, search a vehicle or vessel and require the person in control to stop it, and seize anything that appears to be evidence of an offence under the Act. Section 23(3) lets a justice of the peace grant a warrant, valid for one month, to enter and search premises. Section 23(2) does not itself give a power to enter premises.
What counts as a 'firearm' under the Firearms Act 1968 now?
Under s.57(1) as in force on 4 October 2026, a firearm is a lethal barrelled weapon, a prohibited weapon, or a relevant component part of either. A lethal barrelled weapon is a barrelled weapon that can discharge a shot, bullet or other missile with kinetic energy of more than one joule at the muzzle. Airsoft guns within s.57A are excluded. An imitation firearm is a different thing: anything that has the appearance of being a firearm, whether or not it can discharge anything.
Which firearms offences can be committed with an imitation firearm?
Sections 16A, 17, 18, 19 and 20 all refer to firearms or imitation firearms, so an imitation can be enough. Section 16 refers only to a firearm or ammunition, so an imitation is not enough for s.16. Check s.17(4) too: for s.17, the definition of firearm is applied without paragraphs (b) and (c) of s.57(1).
What is the difference between s.1 PCA 1953 and s.139 CJA 1988?
Section 1 Prevention of Crime Act 1953 deals with an offensive weapon in a public place: an article made or adapted to cause injury, or intended by the person having it for that use. Section 139 Criminal Justice Act 1988 deals with an article with a blade or point in a public place and needs no intent at all. Both put the burden on the defendant, but the defences differ: s.1 has lawful authority or reasonable excuse, and s.139 has good reason or lawful authority plus use at work, religious reasons or national costume.
Is a folding knife with a blade under 3 inches always legal to carry?
No. Section 139(3) takes a folding pocketknife outside the offence only if the cutting edge of its blade does not exceed 3 inches. The Court of Appeal in R v Deegan (1998) held that a knife whose blade locks open is not a folding pocketknife for this purpose, so blade length does not help the holder. They would then need to prove good reason or lawful authority.
What does s.139AA CJA 1988 add?
It is the threatening offence. The person must have an article with them in a public place or on school premises, unlawfully and intentionally threaten another person with it, and do so in a way that a reasonable person exposed to the same threat would think there was an immediate risk of physical harm. Section 139AA(1A) covers further education premises. The maximum on indictment is 4 years, and s.312 of the Sentencing Code makes provision about the sentence the court may be required to impose on offenders aged 16 or over.
Does a suspended sentence trigger a firearms ban?
Yes, if it is three months or more. Section 21(2C) says a person given a suspended sentence of imprisonment of three months or more must not have a firearm or ammunition for five years beginning with the second day after the sentence is passed. The lifetime ban in s.21(1) applies to sentences of three years or more. A person caught in s.21 can apply to the Crown Court to have the prohibition removed under s.21(6).
How much of the sergeants exam is drugs, firearms and weapons?
We cannot say for future papers, and the College says its subject breakdown is only valid for the sitting it covers. In the March 2026 sergeants' breakdown we counted 13 scored questions in these areas out of 140: 5 under misuse of drugs, 3 under firearms and gun crime and 5 under weapons. That is a count for that one sitting, not a weighting you can rely on.
What is the legal test for use of force by a police officer?
In a criminal case the question is whether the force was reasonable in the circumstances as the officer believed them to be. That comes from s.3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967 (force reasonable in the circumstances to prevent crime or make a lawful arrest), applied through s.76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. The belief only has to be genuinely held, not reasonable, but force that is disproportionate in those circumstances is not treated as reasonable.
Does the officer's belief have to be reasonable?
No. Under s.76(4) the reasonableness of the belief is relevant only to whether it was genuinely held. If it was genuinely held, the officer can rely on it even if it was mistaken and even if the mistake was unreasonable. The exception in s.76(5) is a mistake caused by voluntarily induced intoxication.
What is the difference between disproportionate and grossly disproportionate force?
Outside a householder case, force that is disproportionate in the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be is not to be regarded as reasonable (s.76(6)). In a householder case the bar is higher: only force that is grossly disproportionate is treated as unreasonable (s.76(5A)). Force that is disproportionate but not grossly so can still be reasonable in a householder case, depending on all the circumstances.
Is there a duty to retreat before using force?
No. Section 76(6A) says the possibility of retreat is a factor to be taken into account so far as relevant, rather than giving rise to a duty to retreat. It is neither a duty nor irrelevant. A question that offers 'there is a duty to retreat where safe', 'retreat is irrelevant' or 'failing to retreat makes the force automatically unlawful' is wrong.
When can a constable use force under s.117 PACE?
Where a provision of PACE confers a power on a constable and does not make that power exercisable only with the consent of someone other than a police officer, the officer may use reasonable force, if necessary, in exercising it. An intimate sample, which needs the appropriate consent under s.62, is the standard example of a power where s.117 does not authorise force. Powers outside PACE do not carry s.117 with them.
Which Convention rights are absolute?
Article 3 (no torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) is the one the exam leans on: it has no second paragraph allowing interference. Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11 are qualified rights, each with a second paragraph allowing interference that is prescribed by law, pursues a listed aim and is necessary in a democratic society. Article 2 is in a category of its own: it has no balancing paragraph, but Article 2(2) lists the only circumstances in which force that results in death is not a breach.
What is the Article 2 test for lethal force?
Article 2(2) says deprivation of life is not a contravention where it results from force that is 'no more than absolutely necessary' in defence of any person from unlawful violence, to effect a lawful arrest or prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained, or to quell a riot or insurrection. Preventing crime generally is not on that list. Its wording is stricter than the domestic reasonable force test in s.3 CLA 1967.
Does Article 2 only stop the police taking life?
No. It also imposes positive obligations. The Osman v United Kingdom (1998) duty arises where the authorities know or ought to know of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual from the criminal acts of a third party, and they must take measures within their powers that, judged reasonably, might be expected to avoid the risk. It is not a guarantee of safety and does not impose an impossible burden.
Is Article 14 a free-standing right?
Not in the way the other Articles are. Article 14 says Convention rights must be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status. The exam point to learn is that it protects the enjoyment of the other Convention rights. Check the detail in Blackstone's chapter 3.16.2, because we have not reproduced its wording here.
Are the police bound by the Human Rights Act?
Yes. Section 6(1) HRA 1998 makes it unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right, and a police force and its officers are the standard example of a public authority. A person who says their rights were breached can bring proceedings under s.7(1)(a), generally within one year of the act complained of, or a longer period the court considers equitable (s.7(5)).
Can a police officer join a trade union under Article 11?
Article 11(2) says the Article does not prevent lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State. Domestic law then restricts it: s.64(1) Police Act 1996 says a member of a police force shall not be a member of any trade union, or of an association aiming to control or influence police pay, pensions or conditions of service, subject to the exceptions in that section (for example s.64(2), for someone already a union member before joining). Treat Article 11 as qualified, not absolute.
Did the legal test for police use of force change in 2026?
We found one verified change to a conduct rule and one procedural change, and neither is to the criminal law test. The first is to the misconduct standard. The Police (Conduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/597), in force from 30 June 2026, replaced the use of force Standard of Professional Behaviour. The second is the Crime and Policing Act 2026, ss.200 to 203 (in force from 29 June 2026), which gives authorised firearms officers charged with a qualifying offence anonymity and reporting protections but does not change when force is lawful. The wording of s.3 CLA 1967 and s.76 CJIA 2008 on legislation.gov.uk showed no police-specific change when we checked on 4 October 2026. See the section on the 2026 changes below.
Will the exam test the 2026 change to the conduct standard?
We cannot say. The College says the exam tests only the law as it appears in the Manuals edition for the sitting, and that later changes are examined only if the College gives notice. Check the candidate handbook for the sitting you are taking and the Blackstone's chapter on the Standards of Professional Behaviour (3.17.2 in the 2026 and 2027 edition lists) rather than relying on this page.
Is the test 'no more than necessary'?
Not in those words. Neither s.3 CLA 1967 nor s.76 CJIA 2008 uses the phrase 'no more than necessary' as the test. The statutory word is 'reasonable'. Necessity appears in s.76(7), which says a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action, and that evidence of having done only what they honestly and instinctively thought was necessary is strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken. 'No more than necessary' is a common shorthand, but use the statutory wording in the exam.
Does a Taser get judged by a different legal standard than other force?
No. A conducted energy device is a use of force option judged by the same reasonableness test as any other tactic (s.3 CLA 1967 and s.76 CJIA 2008). What differs between tactics is the guidance on when and how to use each one, not the legal threshold.
Is the criminal law test the same as the Standards of Professional Behaviour test?
No. Whether an officer committed an offence is decided under s.3 CLA 1967 and s.76 CJIA 2008 (or common law self-defence). Whether an officer breached the Use of Force standard is a misconduct question decided under Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020, reworded from 30 June 2026 by SI 2026/597. Exam options often mix the two, so work out which question is being asked.
Sources and how we checked them
Every factual claim on this page was written from the sources below, read on 4 to 19 October 2026. Rules and figures change, so check the source for the date you are reading this. Where we could not confirm something from an official or independent source, the page says so rather than guessing. Spotted something out of date? See our corrections policy.
- College of Policing: NPPF step two legal examinations candidate handbook 2027 (PDF, September 2026) : read 19 October 2026. 'Examination structure and syllabus': 150 multiple-choice questions testing three areas (crime, evidence and procedure, and general police duties), drawn only from the 2027 Blackstone's Police Manuals. Appendix A: the chapter list for Volumes 1 to 3 used for the area tables and the 2027 chapter numbers on this page; all areas apply to both the sergeants' and inspectors' exams except chapter 1.8 (sergeants only) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- College of Policing: NPPF step two candidate handbook 2026 (PDF, September 2025), Appendix A : the 2026 edition chapter list, compared with the 2027 list on 19 October 2026: the same three areas and the same chapter numbers for the topics on this page, except theft (1.14 in 2026, 1.15 in 2027), fraud (1.15 to 1.16), the Actus Reus sub-headings, chapter 2.2's title and the 3.18 third stage heading. Also: the 2026 edition chapter list used in our chapter map: 1.14 Theft and Related Offences (1.14.1 to 1.14.13) and 1.15 Fraud (1.15.1 to 1.15.10). The 2027 handbook Appendix A could not be fetched from our environment on 4 October 2026. Also: Blackstone's Police Manual 2026 chapter list used in the chapter map; all chapters apply to both ranks except 1.8. Also: lists the Blackstone's 2026 chapters used on this page (1.6, 1.7, 1.8) and states that chapter 1.8 is for the sergeants' examination only. The 2027 handbook Appendix A could not be opened. Also: list of Blackstone's 2026 chapters used in the chapter map below (1.4.5 to 1.4.7, 3.8.2, 3.8.3, 3.13.2, 3.16.2 and 3.17.2). The 2027 handbook Appendix A could not be fetched (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- Theft Act 1968 (legislation.gov.uk, latest revised version) : ss.1 to 6 (theft and its definitions), s.7 (seven years), s.8 (robbery, life), s.9 (burglary, 14 years dwelling and 10 otherwise, inhabited vehicles and vessels), s.10 (aggravated burglary, life), s.12 (taking a conveyance, summary only, time limits in s.12(4A) to (4C)), s.12A (aggravated vehicle-taking, two years or fourteen if death), s.13 (abstracting electricity, five years), s.21 (blackmail, fourteen years), s.22 (handling, fourteen years), s.24 (scope of stolen goods), s.25 (going equipped, three years), s.34 (gain and loss). All opened and read on 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- Theft Act 1978, s.3 and s.4 (legislation.gov.uk) : making off without payment: elements in s.3(1) to (3), and the maximum of two years on indictment in s.4(2)(b). Only these two sections of the 1978 Act were checked; the rest of the Act was largely replaced by the Fraud Act 2006 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- Fraud Act 2006, ss.1 to 8 and s.11 (legislation.gov.uk) : s.1 (three routes, ten years), s.2 false representation, s.3 failing to disclose, s.4 abuse of position, s.5 gain and loss, s.6 possession of articles (five years), s.7 making or supplying articles (ten years), s.8 article includes electronic programs and data, s.11 obtaining services dishonestly (five years) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s.9 (legislation.gov.uk) : interference with motor vehicles: summary only, up to three months, level 4 fine or both (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- Crime and Policing Act 2026, ss.171 and 255 (legislation.gov.uk) : inserts ss.26A to 26C into the Theft Act 1968; marked 'not in force at Royal Assent' and brought into force by regulations under s.255(1). On 4 October 2026 it was shown as prospective, and we read the three commencement regulations listed on legislation.gov.uk (SI 2026/689, 2026/939 and 2026/960): none brings s.171 into force. The Act's enactment date is shown as 29 April 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- College of Policing: NPPF sergeants' subject area breakdown, March 2026 (PDF) : we counted six rows under the skill 'Theft and related offences' (aggravated burglary, aggravated vehicle-taking, burglary, going equipped, robbery, theft) and two under 'Fraud' (fraud by false representation, gain and loss). A count of that one sitting only; the College says it should not be used to predict later papers. Also: we counted the rows by skill: six Non-fatal offences against the person and two General defences among 140 scored questions; the College says the breakdown is only valid for March 2026. Also: we counted rows by skill: Misuse of drugs 5, Firearms and gun crime 3, Weapons 5 (13 of 140 scored). One sitting only; the College warns the breakdown is valid for March 2026 only (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- College of Policing: NPPF step two exam hub and candidate handbook (2027 version) : syllabus only contained within the Blackstone's Police Manuals edition for the sitting. Not reachable directly from our environment on 4 October 2026, so this statement rests on our own earlier reading of the page as recorded in our other promotion guides (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Offences Against the Person Act 1861 ss.16, 18, 20, 38 and 47 : opened 4 October 2026: wording of each offence; s.16 maximum ten years; s.18 wound or cause GBH with intent to do GBH or to resist or prevent lawful apprehension; s.38 two years; mode of trial of ss.16, 20, 38 and 47 noted as amended by Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 Sch.1 para.5. The England and Wales text of ss.20 and 47 no longer states the number: it says penal servitude with the term omitted by Criminal Justice Act 1948 s.1(2). The five year maximum follows from the as-enacted text (penal servitude, three years), Penal Servitude Act 1891 s.1(1) (penal servitude up to five years where the enactment allowed less) and Criminal Justice Act 1948 s.1(1) (imprisonment for the former maximum term of penal servitude); this is our reading, and the CPS guidance below states five years. The default page also carries a Northern Ireland only version with seven years (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice Act 1988 ss.39 and 39A : common assault and battery summary offences, six months or fine, subject to the 2018 Act; s.39A two-year limit with a six-month condition for domestic abuse cases (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Serious Crime Act 2015 s.75A (inserted by Domestic Abuse Act 2021 s.70) : the strangulation or suffocation offence as revised: elements, consent defence, serious harm exception, five years on indictment, in force 7 June 2022. legislation.gov.uk also listed an outstanding 2026 Act insertion of s.69(2A) in the same Part, which does not change the text of s.75A (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 ss.70 and 71 : s.70 inserted ss.75A and 75B into the 2015 Act; s.71 consent to serious harm for sexual gratification is not a defence to ss.18, 20 and 47, with the STI exception in s.71(4) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 ss.1 and 3 : either way offence, two years on indictment from 28 June 2022; the definition of emergency worker in s.3(1); s.1(3) off-duty cases (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s.76 : the reasonable force test, honest belief, intoxication, householder cases, retreat and the instinctive action considerations; read as up to date to 2 October 2026. Also: s.76(2) defences covered; (3) circumstances as D believed them to be; (4) and (5) honest belief and voluntary intoxication; (5A) grossly disproportionate in a householder case; (6) disproportionate otherwise; (6A) retreat; (7) honest and instinctive necessity; (8A) to (8F) householder case; (9) and (10) purpose and definitions. (5A) and (8A) to (8F) were inserted by the Crime and Courts Act 2013 (25 April 2013), and (2)(aa) and (6A) by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (14 May 2013), according to the revision notes. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Law Act 1967 s.3 and Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 s.117 : s.3(1) reasonable force to prevent crime or make or assist a lawful arrest; s.117 PACE reasonable force by a constable where the Act confers a power (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/117). Also: s.3(1) 'such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large'; s.3(2) replaces the common law rules on when force for those purposes is justified. Part I does not extend to Scotland or Northern Ireland. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Police Act 1996 s.89 and Sentencing Act 2020 s.224 : s.89(1) assault on a constable in the execution of duty, six months; s.89(2) resist or obstruct, one month. Sentencing Act 2020 s.224 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/224) sets the magistrates' court limit at 6 months for summary and 12 months for either way offences as revised (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- CPS: Offences against the Person, incorporating the Charging Standard (updated 26 February 2026) : definitions of assault, battery, ABH and GBH, mode of trial and maximum penalties, R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter, R v Brown, R v Chan-Fook, Golding and Donovan as cited by the CPS, threats to kill intent point, s.39A domestic abuse limit (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- CPS: Strangulation and suffocation (updated 13 November 2025) : points to prove for s.75A, ordinary meaning of strangle and suffocate, intentional act for strangulation versus intentional or reckless battery for suffocation, no injury needed, consent defence limits, applies outside domestic abuse (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 ss.2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9A, 23, 28 and Schedules 2 and 4 : offence wording, s.5(4) and s.28 defences, s.8 list of activities, s.23 powers, Schedule 2 classes and Schedule 4 maximum penalties, latest revised text read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 ss.4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 : production, supply, possession with intent to supply, import and prison possession offences; 7 years on indictment under s.10 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Firearms Act 1968 ss.1, 2, 5, 16, 16A, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 47, 57, 57A and Schedules 1 and 6 : definitions (as in force 4 October 2026, including the 29 June 2026 omission of s.57(1)(d)), offence wording, Schedule 1 offences for s.17(2) and Schedule 6 maximum penalties (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Sentencing Act 2020 s.311 and Schedule 20; Criminal Damage Act 1971 Schedule : minimum sentence for certain prohibited-weapon offences in England and Wales (offender aged 16 or over when the offence was committed: 5 years, or 3 years if under 18 then, subject to exceptional circumstances); the 1971 Act repealed the s.16 words about serious injury to property (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Prevention of Crime Act 1953 ss.1 and 1A : offence, 'lawful authority or reasonable excuse, the proof whereof shall lie on him', the definition of offensive weapon and the 4 year maximum on indictment; s.1A threatening with an offensive weapon in public (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- CPS legal guidance: Drug Offences : states that in R v Lambert [2002] 2 AC 545 the House of Lords held the defendant bears only an evidential burden under s.28 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (read 5 October 2026) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice Act 1988 ss.139, 139A, 139AA, 139B, 141 and 141A : blade or point offence and defences, school and further education premises, threatening offence, power of entry to search, offensive weapons in private (s.141(1A)) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139AB, inserted by Crime and Policing Act 2026 s.28 : new offence of possessing a bladed article or offensive weapon with intent to use unlawful violence; 7 years on indictment. On 4 October 2026 legislation.gov.uk showed s.28 as prospective (not yet in force), and it is not in Commencement Regulations Nos. 1 to 3 (SI 2026/689, 939 and 960) (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Offensive Weapons Act 2019 s.6 and Criminal Law Act 1977 s.8 : corrosive substance in a public place (defences for England and Wales are for the defendant to prove); trespassing with a weapon of offence (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 117 (power of constable to use reasonable force) : reasonable force, if necessary, where a PACE provision confers a power on a constable and does not provide that it may only be exercised with the consent of someone other than a police officer. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 62 (intimate samples) : an intimate sample from a person in police detention only if an inspector authorises it and the appropriate consent is given. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Human Rights Act 1998, Schedule 1 Part I (the Convention rights) : text of Articles 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 11 and 14 as given effect in UK law; Article 2(2) 'no more than absolutely necessary'; Article 11(2) final sentence on restrictions for members of the police. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Human Rights Act 1998, sections 6 and 7 : s.6(1) unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with a Convention right; s.6(3)(b) public functions; s.7(1)(a) proceedings against the authority and s.7(5) one-year period, or longer if equitable. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Police Act 1996, section 64 (membership of trade unions) : s.64(1) bars a member of a police force from membership of a trade union or of an association aiming to influence police pay, pensions or conditions; s.64(2) allows continued membership with the chief officer's consent where the person was a member before joining. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: The Police (Conduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/597) : made 4 June 2026, in force 30 June 2026, England and Wales; replaces the use of force paragraph of Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020; regulation 3 transitional provision for pre-commencement allegations. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 (SI 2020/4), Schedule 2 (Standards of Professional Behaviour) : current text of the Use of Force standard as amended; the original 2020 text on the 'made' version is at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/4/made. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
- legislation.gov.uk: Crime and Policing Act 2026, sections 200 to 203 and 255(3)(h) : anonymity for authorised firearms officers charged with qualifying offences; ss.200 to 203 in force at the end of two months beginning with the day the Act was passed, shown on the site as in force from 29 June 2026. We read the full Act text for any amendment to s.3 CLA 1967, s.76 CJIA 2008 or Article 2 and found none. Read 4 October 2026 (accessed 4 to 19 October 2026)
On this topic elsewhere
More in this guide series
Practice and tools
Disclaimer
PolicePay.co.uk is an independent guide. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by or produced by the College of Policing or Oxford University Press (Blackstone's). Exam rules, dates, syllabus editions and prices change, so check the College of Policing's current candidate handbook and exam pages before you register or buy. Practice material on this site is original and is not real exam content. Details apply to England and Wales unless stated. Details are as checked on 4 to 19 October 2026.