What is the ratio in R v Geddes?

The ratio confirms that for criminal attempts, defendant's acts must be 'more than merely preparatory' - equipping oneself and positioning for crime remains preparation, not attempt.

What did the court decide in R v Geddes?

The Court of Appeal quashed the attempted false imprisonment conviction, holding that the defendant's preparatory actions had not crossed into actual attempt.

Why is R v Geddes important for criminal law?

It clarifies the crucial distinction between preparation and attempt, showing courts take a restrictive approach requiring defendants to have actually commenced the substantive offence.

What is the ratio in R v Geddes?

The ratio confirms that for criminal attempts, defendant's acts must be 'more than merely preparatory' - equipping oneself and positioning for crime remains preparation, not attempt.

What did the court decide in R v Geddes?

The Court of Appeal quashed the attempted false imprisonment conviction, holding that the defendant's preparatory actions had not crossed into actual attempt.

Why is R v Geddes important for criminal law?

It clarifies the crucial distinction between preparation and attempt, showing courts take a restrictive approach requiring defendants to have actually commenced the substantive offence.

Criminal1 min read

Attempts — R v Geddes

[1996] 160 JP 697Court of Appeal1996

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Established the 'more than merely preparatory' test for criminal attempts.”

Facts

Geddes was found in boys' toilets at a school, having equipped himself with rope, masking tape and a knife, apparently intending to kidnap a child. He was discovered before making contact with any pupils and ran away when challenged. He was charged with attempted false imprisonment.

Issues

Whether the defendant's actions went beyond mere preparation and constituted an attempt under s1(1) Criminal Attempts Act 1981, requiring acts 'more than merely preparatory' to the commission of the offence?

Held

The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction, holding that Geddes's actions were merely preparatory. He had not yet moved from the preparation stage to attempted commission of the offence.

Significance

This case is essential for understanding the boundaries of criminal attempts and the preparation/attempt distinction. It demonstrates the courts' restrictive approach to attempt liability and is frequently cited in criminal law courses and practice.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Attempts — R v Geddes. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

R v Geddes [1996] 160 JP 697

Criminal LawAttemptsInchoate Offences

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDL

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.