Firearm owners need Richard Lincoln to be admitted to practice as a Barrister and Solicitor

Richard has spent 7 years study to become a registered lawyer. During this time he has taken two matters to the High Court which have benefited New Zealand firearm owners by millions of dollars.

His totally successful case Lincoln v Police HC Palmerston North CIV-2009-454-473, 5 August 2009 (Mallon J) identified the police thumbhole stock designation as Ultra Vires. (Judgment given to Richard Lincoln and costs). An interlocutory hearing in the same case provided a statement from Mackenzie J that “the police do not have under the Act the ability to make a binding classification of the weapons in question. The court will not be bound by the police interpretation but must itself apply the relevant definition of the firearm in question”.

In 2013 (Lincoln v Commissioner of Police [2013] NZHC 1813 at Christchurch), Richard Lincoln was successful in obtaining:

(1) A declaration that firearm owners no longer had to procure a permit under Section 35 of the Arms Act where a person manufactures an existing semi-automatic firearm to create a MSSA when they held an E Endorsement.

(2) A concession from the Crown representative that immediate “supervision” of an MSSA is available to someone who does not have an E category licence.

While studying and prepared for exams in 2015 he booked his rifle in for repairs to Gunworks (Christchurch). On the way he was apprehended by armed police at Dunsandel. This wrecked his study year and he had to get an Aegrotat Pass (luckily) to continue.

Two years of drama followed and huge defence expense but he was finally acquitted of all charges, after a two day trial on 19th/20th June 2017.

The decision of Maze J. revealed how profoundly ignorant some police are of Firearm Legislation. All charges were dismissed and the police criticised by the Judge. Substantial damages were awarded Richard Lincoln by the District Court.

Subsequent to this case Richard Lincoln had an encounter with an uniformed police officer which frightened him. That evening he posted on the Facebook page of a wife of one of the policeman involved in the Ashburton case an unprofessional comment about her husband. He regrets doing this and has apologised to the officer’s wife.

The New Zealand Law Society consequently opposed his application to be admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor and were successful.

We do not think this lapse of character warrants the confiscation of seven years study and the abandonment of a chosen career. He will specialise in Firearm Law when admitted.

The provocation Richard Lincoln was subjected to has not been fully revealed in the decision made against him. An appeal is the appropriate way to review this decision.