dennis@home wrote:

"A.Lee" wrote in message
...
The firearm was only 'illegal' as he didnt have a certificate for it, it
wasnt illegal in itself, anyone else with the relevant cert. could keep
it lawfully.

Not true.
He could not get a license for it, it was an unlicensable weapon.
He was a criminal from the moment he had it, no better than other criminals.

No one is denying he is/was a criminal.
It was not 'an unlicensable weapon'.
Tony Martin did not have the relevant certificate, so could not keep a
gun.
The relevant gun could be held by anyone else with either a shotgun
cert. or firearms cert. depending on what model the shotgun is.

Alan.
--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.