Suspected burglar stabbed to death by homeowner

[Burnsy2023]

I don't think so. Heard too many stories like: "A foreign student newly arrived in the US stepping towards a property owner explaining that he's coming with no harm but got shot down. The property owner held no responsibility at all".

I think they key thing is that in your scenario the robber has left.

 

[hola_adios]

I don't think so. Heard too many stories like: "A foreign student newly arrived in the US stepping towards a property owner explaining that he's coming with no harm but got shot down. The property owner held no responsibility at all".

"Stories" are not relevant, in order to claim self defence, you will have to convince a judge/jury. So be careful before you go to the US, rent a hotel room and kill the room service boy (I heard that story )

 

[harmony]

"Stories" are not relevant, in order to claim self defence, you will have to convince a judge/jury. So be careful before you go to the US, rent a hotel room and kill the room service boy (I heard that story )

Stories are just very relevant indeed, because in many countries the final way to resolve a dispute is to refer to outcomes in historical cases.

 

[hola_adios]

Stories are just very relevant indeed, because in many countries the final way to resolve a dispute is to refer to outcomes in historical cases.

You are confusing jurisprudence with urban myths.

If Hattori's case were to happen today, the shooter would have been found guilty in the criminal case, and not in the civil one only.

 

[Vonhelmet]

I don't think so. Heard too many stories like: "A foreign student newly arrived in the US stepping towards a property owner explaining that he's coming with no harm but got shot down. The property owner held no responsibility at all".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshihiro_Hattori

So in one case, someone is advancing and gets shot, and you think that means you could shoot a burglar when he was leaving?

I bet you sucked at "Spot the difference" puzzles when you were little.

 

[Gackt]

In the US if someone robs my house, I let him leave, (and just when he starts to step outside my house) I pull out my gun, shoot him down, take back my cash, report to police, and be done with it.

And you honestly see nothing wrong with shooting someone who is not threatening you in any way?

 

[Tefal]

In the US if someone robs my house, I let him leave, (and just when he starts to step outside my house) I pull out my gun, shoot him down, take back my cash, report to police, and be done with it.

and you'd be charged with murder.

 

[harmony]

So in one case, someone is advancing and gets shot, and you think that means you could shoot a burglar when he was leaving?

I bet you sucked at "Spot the difference" puzzles when you were little.

You have probably missed my point by focusing on spotting the difference. I read too many such news and I have a feeling that if someone breaks into your house in the UK, rapes your daughter and wife, you'll have to watch and call police after the criminal.

 

[Vonhelmet]

You have probably missed my point by focusing on spotting the difference. I read too many such news and I have a feeling that if someone breaks into your house in the UK, rapes your daughter and wife, you'll have to watch and call police after the criminal.

Le sigh.

 

[harmony]

And you honestly see nothing wrong with shooting someone who is not threatening you in any way?

and you'd be charged with murder.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

Conditions of use

Each state differs with respect to the specific instances in which the Castle Doctrine can be invoked, and what degree of retreat or non-deadly resistance (if any) is required before deadly force can be used.
In general, (one) or a variety of conditions must be met before a person can legally use the Castle Doctrine:
An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully and/or forcibly enter an occupied residence, business or vehicle.
The intruder must be acting illegally—e.g. the Castle Doctrine does not give the right to attack officers of the law acting in the course of their legal duties
The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home
The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to commit some other felony, such as arson or burglary
The occupant(s) of the home must not have provoked or instigated an intrusion, or provoked or instigated an intruder to threaten or use deadly force
The occupant(s) of the home may be required to attempt to exit the house or otherwise retreat (this is called the "Duty to retreat" and most self-defense statutes referred to as examples of "Castle Doctrine" expressly state that the homeowner has no such duty)
In all cases, the occupant(s) of the home must be there legally, must not be fugitives from the law, must not be using the Castle Doctrine to aid or abet another person in being a fugitive from the law, and must not use deadly force upon an officer of the law or an officer of the peace while they are performing or attempting to perform their legal duties.
Note: the term "home" is used because most states only apply their Castle Doctrine to a place of residence; however, some states extend the protection to other legally-occupied places such as automobiles and places of business.

At least it's OK to shoot down the intruder under certain conditions in the US. In the UK, good luck with your unarmed fight. (because if you use a knife it's very likely to be a deadly fight)

 

[Tefal]

No where does that say it's acceptable to wait for them to finish then shoot them in the back as they leave.

 

[Werewolf]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine



At least it's OK to shoot down the intruder under certain conditions in the US. In the UK, good luck with your unarmed fight. (because if you use a knife it's very likely to be a deadly fight)

The flip side of that argument, is that in the UK the Milkman, Meter Reader, and Paper Boy aren't likely to get shot by some paranoid idiot (it's fairly telling that in some of the more extreme "self defence" states the law is sometimes referred to as the "shoot the milkman" law).

It's also worth remembering that UK law says any level of force that could be considered reasonable (so anything you've got at hand is potentially allowable - including harpoons*), and the burglers here are quite unlikely to be armed, and extremely unlikely to be armed with a gun unlike the states.


*Real case, a diver grabbed his harpoon gun when someone tried breaking in his front door whilst threatening him (about 3-4 years ago).

 

[harmony]

The flip side of that argument, is that in the UK the Milkman, Meter Reader, and Paper Boy aren't likely to get shot by some paranoid idiot (it's fairly telling that in some of the more extreme "self defence" states the law is sometimes referred to as the "shoot the milkman" law).

It's also worth remembering that UK law says any level of force that could be considered reasonable (so anything you've got at hand is potentially allowable - including harpoons*), and the burglers here are quite unlikely to be armed, and extremely unlikely to be armed with a gun unlike the states.


*Real case, a diver grabbed his harpoon gun when someone tried breaking in his front door whilst threatening him (about 3-4 years ago).

Ermm, can I use a knife, if the intruder is taller and stronger than me, and I reasonably believe he threatens my life even if he's unarmed, in the UK?

 

[Glaucus]

Ermm, can I use a knife, if the intruder is taller and stronger than me, and I reasonably believe he threatens my life even if he's unarmed, in the UK?

Yes, just like the man in the op.

You can use anything at hand, if you feel it's needed. What you can't do is attack them when they pose no threat. If they leave you can't use any force. Is where most of the people who have gone to prison have done. Intruder has left or tried leaving and are chased and killed. Or shot in the back.

 

[harmony]

Yes, just like the man in the op.

You can use anything at hand, if you feel it's needed. What you can't do is attack them when they pose no threat. If they leave you can't use any force. Is where most of the people who have gone to prison have done. Intruder has left or tried leaving and are chased and killed. Or shot in the back.

You mean in the US, forensic analysis must show that the bullet goes inside the body from the frontal side of the intruder, otherwise the shooter is responsible of murder? Clever robber can just step backwards into any house and rob whatever without having to worry about a fight to death then.

 

[Vonhelmet]

You mean in the US, forensic analysis must show that the bullet goes inside the body from the frontal side of the intruder, otherwise the shooter is responsible of murder? Clever robber can just step backwards into any house and rob whatever without having to worry about a fight to death then.

Criminal mastermind, aren't you.

 

[scorza]

Criminal mastermind, aren't you.

Tbf it's no more ludicrous than suggestions that changes to the law in this area will lead to a rash of murders where the victim was invited round for tea then murdered in cold blood.

 

[Meridian]

It's also the one that I think most of us (who aren't brainwashed by the DM) expected.

My only doubt was if things hadn't been as initially reported, the law worked pretty well and as it usually does in these cases (investigation, no prosecution if homeowners version tallies with evidence and it is self defence).
It's rare for these cases to even go reach a court room, and about as rare as hens teeth for a Jury to convict even when the level of force is OTT.

Indeed. The only unusual thing about this story is that the release without charge got a major mention. Normally it's ignored or dropped with one line on page 43.


M

 

[Meridian]

*Real case, a diver grabbed his harpoon gun when someone tried breaking in his front door whilst threatening him (about 3-4 years ago).

This is a bit more complicated. He was actually convicted because there appeared to be premeditation (he was already in dispute with the victim and his mates, and the speargun was kept by the front door), but the conviction was overturned on appeal.


M

 

[Von Smallhausen]

You mean in the US, forensic analysis must show that the bullet goes inside the body from the frontal side of the intruder, otherwise the shooter is responsible of murder? Clever robber can just step backwards into any house and rob whatever without having to worry about a fight to death then.

I would just shout HE'S BEHIND YOU .......

- bang -