That's why it's called suspicion of murder. And it's a reasonable suspicion when a person has been stabbed to death, as in general terms, and under our legal system, stabbing someone to death is a disproportionate response to their trying to rob you.
Suspected burglar stabbed to death by homeowner
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
That's why it's called suspicion of murder. And it's a reasonable suspicion when a person has been stabbed to death, as in general terms, and under our legal system, stabbing someone to death is a disproportionate response to their trying to rob you.
No it's not the two are separate. A person is innocent till proven guilty. A crime scene you think the worse till proven otherwise.
It is not presumptuous at all, it is following a well laid out procedure.
So how exactly should he be treated?
should he be arrested?
If so what for?
Should the house be treated as a crime scene and forensically investigated?
Should he be questioned in a police station while under arrest?
Pretty much, though I am not sure why I bother once again getting in the way of Scorza's righteous indignation.
That sounds awfully like a presumption that the home owner is guilty in these sort of cases to me!
Remember that just because it's the law, or a police procedure it doesn't mean it's fair or right. It wouldn't be the first time that police procedures have been found to be inherently prejudicial.
The reason why these incidents are investigated as murder from the start is simply because that's the police's job. They need to prove one way or another whether a murder took place. By the time they make that decision they've seen all of the relevant evidence that they could recover, thus if it wasn't murder then they can quickly decide if a lesser crime took place.
Working the other way round doesn't work;
1. Cop sees a corpse.
2. Cop sees stab wounds on corpse.
3. Cop sees bloody knife.
4. Cop assumes person fell on knife.
5. Case closed, accidental death.
6. Murderer walks free.
Working the other way round doesn't work;
1. Cop sees a corpse.
2. Cop sees stab wounds on corpse.
3. Cop sees bloody knife.
4. Cop assumes person fell on knife.
5. Case closed, accidental death.
6. Murderer walks free.
+1 for the smart homeowner, shame about the stupid sodding justice system this poxy country endures
in the back as they ran away with an illegal shotgun?
They had been troubling him for a long time and the police weren't doing anything about it, so (provided that is true) he did the right thing imo.
You think he was right to shoot someone in the back as they ran away? And to be in possession of an unlicenced shotgun?
Not so much that, but that the person he shot deserved it.
Really? I don't think a burglar deserves to die for burglary alone...
Multiple burglaries and harassing an old man means the guy doesn't get any sympathy from me, assuming that was the case of course.
Maybe buy CCTV instead of an illegally-owned shotgun? Then the kid would still be alive and it would be him in prison, not Mr Martin.
Actually, thinking on it, Mr Martin is a prime example of why the police will investigate murder, rather than presuming self-defence. He murdered a child, yet this only came to light through a murder investigation. If they didn't treat the case as a murder trial then they never would have got the murder verdict. Worse, if they assumed it was self defence (as some on here seem to think is right) then he may even have gotten away with the whole thing.
Well it all comes down to what is reasonable force, shooting someone with the intent to kill them is probably not reasonable force for a burglary, no.
Having said that, I'm sure you weren't upset to learn that the moron died.
In Brazil the law is if someone breaks into your house or property you can legally kill them unless they get away. This is how we should do business, if you are one of the many scumbags who would make the decision to burgle then if this was the law you knew you would be taking the decision to risk you life.......end of.