Variously the Act says this "It is an OFFENCE to usean instrument which is false with the intention of inducing somebody to accept it as genuine and, by reason of so accepting it, to do or not to do some act to his own or another's prejudice." "A person guilty of an offence shall be liable to a term not exceeding ten years" "The meaning of INSTRUMENT (includes) any other device ON or in which information is recorded or stored by mechanical, electronic or other means" A military medal must be an instrument then ? For it records information by which, upon display, it conveys to other persons the information that its wearer acted in a meritorious way rewarded by the issue of the medal. Which would mean that, for example, someone who wears medals to which he is not entitled and any photos thereof are instruments, within the act, and if they result in someone else doing or not doing an act to their own or another prejudice the offence of using a false instrument would be complete. Surely an SAS stable belt if worn at Deal Barracks in 1982 to convey to another person the impression the wearer is in or of SAS would make the belt in the circustances a false instrument. And if someone like Royal Marine Corporal Simon C BELL as a result of being so misled particpiated to his own later prejudice in a training mission to Belgium the offence becomes comnplete at the time the prejudice manifests. And so so and so on and so on What do you reckon Mr SHORTT ?