DPP v Starr

The appeal before the Court was brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who sought to overturn a decision of the Local Court, which had dismissed a charge against the appellant, Starr, of possessing knuckle-dusters in a public place. The Local Court had found that the prosecution had failed to prove that Starr knew that the items were knuckle-dusters. The Court of Appeal was required to consider the meaning of "the user" of knuckle-dusters and whether it was sufficient for the prosecution to prove that the appellant knew that the items were for use as weapons.

The Court of Appeal found that the meaning of "the user" of knuckle-dusters was not limited to the person who would physically wear them. Instead, it was sufficient for the prosecution to prove that the appellant knew that the items were for use as weapons, regardless of whether they were intended for use by the appellant or another person. The Court found that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to prove that Starr knew that the items were knuckle-dusters and that they were intended for use as weapons. The Court of Appeal therefore overturned the decision of the Local Court and found Starr guilty of possessing knuckle-dusters in a public place.

The Court of Appeal ordered that Starr be sentenced in accordance with the Weapons Prohibition Act 1990. The Court also ordered that the appeal be allowed, the conviction of the Local Court be set aside and that a conviction be entered in the Court of Appeal. Starr was ordered to pay costs of the appeal.