Under age drinking

[MartinHP71]

Standing in the local co-op the other day I noticed the licensing information where it said it was an offence for a person to attempt to buy alcohol under the age of 18.

Where does the law stand therefore on sending in under age people to "Test" the system and try and buy drink ? Is there a dispensation to allow for this or is the law being broken when a 16 year old is employed to go and attempt to buy a drink ???

[Masked Marauder]

Yes, there is a specific exemption for that purpose, it is also the case for tobacco products, fireworks, knifes, solvents, DVDs, games etc.

[MartinHP71]

Thank you kind sir, question answered.

[oldcodger]

this is the relevant bit

Licensing Act 2003
154 (2) A weights and measures inspector may make, or authorise any person to make on his behalf, such purchases of goods as appear expedient for the purpose of determining whether those provisions are being complied with.

[MartinHP71]

Thanks oldcodger, kind sir.

[clinka]

Just sticking my twopence worth in, we have operations to do exactly what you ask. We generally use Police Cadets rather than young members of the public. In addition we also carry out licensing checks specifically in pubs/clubs with over 21 rules and use young specials or young police officers.

The risk assesssments carried out are very thorough and the safety of the young person is much more important than the success of the operation.

[Tiffany]

I think it's great that licensed premises are being "tested" to see if they're selling to kids. But, can't that be classed as "entrapment" with some smart ass lawyer's help?

[oldcodger]

Entrapment is an american thing. In the UK entrapment is not available as a defence.

[Tiffany]

Entrapment is an american thing. In the UK entrapment is not available as a defence.

Ah right, you learn something new every day.

[MartinHP71]

That will teach you not to watch Starsky and Hutch or Columbo ...lol

[Masked Marauder]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapm...land_and_Wales

England and Wales

Entrapment arises when a person is encouraged by someone in some official capacity to commit a crime. If entrapment occurred, then some prosecution evidence may be excluded as being unfair, or the proceedings may be discontinued altogether.

Some examples of entrapment are as follows:-

A police officer encourages a person to commit a crime so that the officer can have him prosecuted for that crime.
The greater the degree of entrapment by the police officer, the more likely the court will see it as entrapment. See the case (R v Bryne[2003]). That is, entrapment is not a substantive defence (R v Sang); i.e. it does not automatically negate the prosecution case.

Customs Officers who aid and abet fraud in order to prosecute the fraud. A notorious example of this occurred in 2003. The 'Stockade' prosecution ended in failure when the Court of Appeal quashed convictions against seven people accused in connection with the alleged diversion of £105 million in excise duty (VAT). The conduct of such Excise diversion cases resulted in the loss of up to £2 billion in public revenue.

If a person has committed an offence because of entrapment, the Court may stay the proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuses of process (which prevents the case going ahead) or exclude evidence under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The grant of a stay is normally the most appropriate response.

The main authority on entrapment in the United Kingdom is the decision of the House of Lords in R. v. Loosely; Attorney-General's Reference (n.3 of 2000). A grant of a stay is awarded if the conduct of the state was so seriously improper that the administration of justice was brought into disrepute. In deciding whether to grant a stay, the Court will consider, as a useful guide, whether the police did more than present the defendant with an unexceptional opportunity to commit a crime.

In Loosely, Lords Hoffman and Hutton indicated certain factors that should be considered in deciding whether proceedings against a defendant should be stayed. These include:

• whether the police acted in good faith;
• whether the police had good reason to suspect the accused of criminal activities;
• whether the police suspected that crime was particularly prevalent in the area in which the investigation took place (Williams v. DPP);
• whether pro-active investigatory techniques were necessary because of the secrecy and difficulty of detection of the criminal activity in question;
• the defendant's circumstances and vulnerability; and
• the nature of the offence.

It has been held that it is generally acceptable for the police to conduct test purchases (DPP v. Marshall) or pose as passengers to catch unlicensed taxi drivers (Nottingham City Council v. Amin).

Scotland

In Scotland the main authority is the case of Browns v. HMA which stated that entrapment will occur when law enforcement officials cause an offence to be committed which would not have occurred had it not been for their involvement. The remedies available correspond with those in England and are considered to be either a plea in bar of trial or a challenge to the admissibility of evidence obtained through entrapment.

[spinlondon]

That is where an official gets someone to commit a crime, and then arrests or causes them to be arrested and then proescuted for that crime.
By getting an underage person to purchase alcohol, they are not encouraging the seller to sell the alcohol.
So in this case, the entrapment would be if they were to prosecute the underage person.

[Masked Marauder]

That is where an official gets someone to commit a crime, and then arrests or causes them to be arrested and then proescuted for that crime.
By getting an underage person to purchase alcohol, they are not encouraging the seller to sell the alcohol.
So in this case, the entrapment would be if they were to prosecute the underage person.

Correct, another example would be if an officer went into a pub and said to someone that they wanted some brown and would the third party go and buy some for them, then they arrest the third party. If the third party could reasonably argue that he would not have done that but for the enticement to do so by the officer then that is entrapment.

[Tiffany]

That will teach you not to watch Starsky and Hutch or Columbo ...lol

No!, I loved CHIPS with Erik Estrada,

[Tiffany]

Thanks MM, & spinlondon- now I fully understand.

[Meridian]

No, that's a pretty routine test drugs buy. My understanding is that the argument of entrapment has been brought up in court in these circumstances, but usually fails unless the defendant can show that the police encouraged or forced the defendant to carry out the supply to an unreasonable degree. That's as opposed to merely asking for the gear. Let's face it: if you (as an undercover officer) asked anyone who was NOT a drugs dealer to get you sorted, they'd tell you to **** off. If I ask you to perform an illegal act and you simply go off and do it, it's difficult to show that I "entrapped" you.


M

[Masked Marauder]

No, that's a pretty routine test drugs buy. My understanding is that the argument of entrapment has been brought up in court in these circumstances, but usually fails unless the defendant can show that the police encouraged or forced the defendant to carry out the supply to an unreasonable degree. That's as opposed to merely asking for the gear. Let's face it: if you (as an undercover officer) asked anyone who was NOT a drugs dealer to get you sorted, they'd tell you to **** off. If I ask you to perform an illegal act and you simply go off and do it, it's difficult to show that I "entrapped" you.

M

I did clearly qualify that there had to be an enticement for the third party to buy on behalf of the officer, and any defence of entrapment would be dependent on the level of enticement!

I could have gone as far as to mention 'Honey Trap' and 'Wimbledon Common'.

[Masked Marauder]

No!, I loved CHIPS with Erik Estrada,

So did just about every gay guy in the world. Personally I was only about 13 at the time and did not realise the significance of the big motorcycles and tight uniforms.....

[MartinHP71]

So did just about every gay guy in the world. Personally I was only about 13 at the time and did not realise the significance of the big motorcycles and tight uniforms.....

But you do now ????

[Masked Marauder]

My wife won't let me watch it these days!

[channa]

When I ran the pub in Bradford the local police actively sent underages into suspected premises to try and buy alcohol.

Where the young people were served , the licencee was prosecuted.

The Co Op actually in this neck of the woods operate a policy of if you are lucky enough to look under 25 you will be asked for ID.

FWIW in the pub the lads were quite easy to spot, the girls were the problem...!!!

I actually have a little empathy for pubs clubs and stores, It seems the law puts the emphasis on the 'seller' It seems no account is taken that the 16 year old trying to buy alcohol are equally guilty of an offence at best a caution.

In the case of the seller a genuine misjudgement loss of livelihood.

Channa

[oldcodger]

No defence of entrapment is available to a shopkeeper who sells alcohol to an underage purchaser if he does so solely on the basis of a simple request from such a person. Basically UK law considers that we all have free will and can agree or refuse any request put to us. In those circumstances no defence of entrapment is available.

Although there is some case law on the subject, almost all of it makes the use of an entrapment defence extremely difficult if not impossible.