Good point. At the end of the day robbing people's houses is their trade and if they perceive an increased risk of harm then it makes sense that they're going to start taking precautions. I imagine most will regard this as an isolated incident but it seems likely that the rest will take extra precautions as opposed to finding a different way to make money.
Suspected burglar stabbed to death by homeowner
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
Good point. At the end of the day robbing people's houses is their trade and if they perceive an increased risk of harm then it makes sense that they're going to start taking precautions. I imagine most will regard this as an isolated incident but it seems likely that the rest will take extra precautions as opposed to finding a different way to make money.
Most people who're breaking into houses do so using tools, which bumps the charge up from straight burglary to aggravated burglary. It's no different than two people having a fight in a bar, where the charge might be assault until someone picks up a bottle and starts swinging that, at which point it becomes aggravated assault.
So if they're carrying a tool, it should be (and rightly so) considered an offensive weapon. I've seen a few court cases where individuals have been stabbed with screwdrivers (the best tool for nicking cars) trying to protect their cars from being stolen.
what are you talking about?
How is the law protecting the burglar?
how is it punishing the home-owner?
All it's doing is finding out if what he says happened really happened.
If it is what he said then he won't be charged.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,341
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-13916190
See !!!
Now all those people who thinks the law is always on the burglar's side, not always!
Though he can still be charged at a later date if they find out something they don't know now, but still!
See !!!
Now all those people who thinks the law is always on the burglar's side, not always!
Though he can still be charged at a later date if they find out something they don't know now, but still!
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,341
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Bailed, but he hasn't been charged...as far as i know.
If someone is charged with murder, they would be hard pressed to get bail!
You would hope so, but the CPS have charged people in the past when all evidence points to them being innocent.
The CPS, from memory have a duty to charge when in the public interest as well as when the evidence is fairly clear as reported in the press (you rarely hear of the full information as to why they've charged someone in the press).
Hence they'll sometimes charge when the evidence is weak, if it's felt that the case is in the public interest to get the full facts out and the law clarified.
In the case of self defence/defending the home the CPS know that the chances of a conviction are extremely slim (hence so few prosecutions, and even fewer guilty verdicts), but it can help clear any doubt about the innocence of the home owner by getting the facts out into the public record.
It's one of the reasons the Police are someimtes(unfairly in my mind), prosecuted for things that if you, or I did it we wouldn't be due to lack of firm evidence, or we'd be offered a FPN for.
Do we really need to answer that one?
Well as people defended the man who chased a burglar down the road got his brother and a cricket bat then broke it over the burglar's skull giving him permanent brain damage before they both set in for a good long beating on the guy. Yeah I think we do.
Where did I say defending a public street, nowhere..
Enter someone's house/property at your own risk, once that person is no longer on the property, let the police deal with it.
I like to see how you would react if someone came into your house?, to steal your belongings and threaten/beat your family, cracking a cricket back across his head would come to mind and at the time I don't think you would care of the consequences would you?
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
We already have them Nath.
It all hinges on the actions of the homeowner and whether the force used was reasonable in the circumstances. In this scenario, a man died so the persons suspected of killing him will be arrested.
As said earlier in here, police can't write off a dead body at the scene on the word of the homeowner alone. Due process and investigation is essential.
Who said a dead body should be "written off" by the police? Why does the due process involve presuming the householder is guilty and arresting him? Reasonable grounds for suspicion are required for arrest in all cases, why are these cases different?
What are you talking about? See s.24(2) PACE: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/24
Reasonable grounds for suspicion is a very low threshold. It had to be. Policeman is confronted with a dead burglar and a man saying he stabbed him in self-defence. He suspects some sort of homicide crime, like manslaughter or murder, may possibly have been committed (there is a stabbed man!)
He considers the arrest of the householder necessary to enable the speedy investigation of the (extremely serious) potential crime. Man is questioned at the police station, it becomes apparent he is an upright citizen very likely acting in self-defence. He is bailed and the investigation continues. What is wrong with that?
My point was where to you draw the line between incapacitating/defending your family against an intruder, to being free to stabbing someone.
If I no longer desire your presence on my property and demand that you leave, and you don't, am I then entitled to stab you to death?
If I am trespassing on your property, does that mean you are entitled to kill me?
Defending yourself and your family is one thing, going and killing intruders is another.