Businessman facing life imprisonment for tackling burglars

The Geezer · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:18

Zethor said:
One of the burglar is still in crutches 10 months later, they were not small fractures. Anyone who is capable of such levels of violence should be in prison, no excuse. I'd rather have thieves running around freely than raging lunatics capable of such assaults.

I have to agree, I presume the man is insured so would have been compensated. I do also appreciated the mental anguish burglary can cause but it wasn't his home.

Dolph · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:19

Freefaller said:
Of course, you're right. However, I know it is just a sensationalist article, and justice needs to be done, however I cannot fathom why the guys are effectively getting off "scott free" by a tiny fine, irrespective of what the victim did (and I still hold he is the victim) they should still have the law applied as hard as possible to them.

I agree completely, but would add the caveat that they are being treated normally by the law...

randomshenans · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:19

Zethor said:
I don't agree. Society should protect the rights of everyone, including those who choose a life of crime.

Problem with our society is just that tbh

bloodiedathame · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:20

Zethor said:
I don't agree. Society should protect the rights of everyone, including those who choose a life of crime.

What's your reasoning behind this stance, out of interest?

SeraphX · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:20

Give the guy a medal!

Shoot the thieves in the damn faces!

scorza · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:21

The Geezer said:
I have to agree, I presume the man is insured so would have been compensated. I do also appreciated the mental anguish burglary can cause but it wasn't his home.

Yeah it was only his livelihood. Who cares if someone works hard to feed their family - these people are mugs, as long as they provide something for junkies to rob to feed their habit that's the main thing.

Josh · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:21

No more force than is necessary and is reasonable in the circumstance, broken limbs I don't think will be seen as necessary or reasonable by a jury.

Possible suspended sentence, more than likely a small sentence 1-2 years serve half and get his remand time off, probably 6-8 months inside.

As a guess.

*edit* Before people jump all over that I don't condone either action by the persons involved. Call Police and only attack if you deem it a risk to your own safety. Thats my view.

Dolph · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:23

bloodiedathame said:
What's your reasoning behind this stance, out of interest?

I can give my reasoning, because rights are always a balance. That is why we have self defence laws tempered by excessive force standards, to maintain that balance without swinging it one way or the other.

Zethor · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:23

randomshenans said:
Problem with our society is just that tbh

There are places in the world that don't have this "problem". In example, theft in Saudi Arabia can lead to the capital punishment, maybe you'd feel at home there.

randomshenans · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:23

While his force was clearly excessive and should not be acceptable, he was a repeat victim of crime which I doubt very little was done about from the laws side. Criminals get 75quid fine and he has had to deal with the fallout of repeatedly being targeted.

Those who know the law and have spent their lives breaking it, know the system and play it. Those who try and protect what they have worked so hard for get the book thrown. Again, this was excessive, no doubt, but in general this is the case.

randomshenans · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:25

Zethor said:
There are places in the world that don't have this "problem". In example, theft in Saudi Arabia can lead to the capital punishment, maybe you'd feel at home there.

It's OK, I live in France where they throw baguettes at you if you steal. Onions if you do it twice.

The Geezer · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:25

scorza said:
Yeah it was only his livelihood. Who cares if someone works hard to feed their family - these people are mugs, as long as they provide something for junkies to rob to feed their habit that's the main thing.

For me, i hope we are more civilised than some other countries where we show a little more compassion to those who transgress.

Sharia Law, anyone ?

scorza · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:30

Zethor said:
There are places in the world that don't have this "problem". In example, theft in Saudi Arabia can lead to the capital punishment, maybe you'd feel at home there.

Can it? I thought that the punishment for theft in Saudi was having your hand chopped off. I bet there aren't many re-offenders.

Adam_101 · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:31

[TW]Fox;25709368 said:
Presumably it's up to a court to decide whether the force was appropriate or not.

Yes. Seems to be the case regardless. Heard so many stories like this with the homeowners getting into more trouble then the burglars.

scorza · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:31

The Geezer said:
For me, i hope we are more civilised than some other countries where we show a little more compassion to those who transgress.

Sharia Law, anyone ?

I quite agree, under Sharia your hand is chopped off after the first offence. Personally I think that punishment would only be appropriate after a second offence. There won't be any third offences.

Cosimo · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:33

SeraphX said:
Give the guy a medal!

Probably would have got one in Texas. The thieving scum got what they deserved.

Glaucus · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:35

Adam_101 said:
Yes. Seems to be the case regardless. Heard so many stories like this with the homeowners getting into more trouble then the burglars.

For a darn good reason, their offence is far greater than a burglar. He will be convicted and that will be absolutely right. The self defence laws are heavily skewed in our favour, but as soon as they run away there is no threat, so you can not use self defence. It really is pretty simple.

And lol at the OP, not giving the facts.

Glaucus · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:36

scorza said:
I quite agree, under Sharia your hand is chopped off after the first offence. Personally I think that punishment would only be appropriate after a second offence. There won't be any third offences.

and a lifetime of disability benefit and little chance of reform, yeah such a great outcome you want.
And pretty pointless as you can get robotic apotheosis and they are getting better ever year. So won't be long till its an utterly pointless endeavour.

The Geezer · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:36

Glaucus said:
For a darn good reason, their offence is far greater than a burglar. He will be convicted and that will be absolutely right. The self defence laws are heavily skewed in our favour, but as soon as they run away there is no threat, so you can not use self defence. It really is pretty simple.

And lol at the OP, not giving the facts.

Bingo

Adam_101 · 23 Jan 2014 at 08:37

Glaucus said:
For a darn good reason, their offence is far greater than a burglar. He will be convicted and that will be absolutely right. The self defence laws are heavily skewed in our favour, but as soon as they run away there is no threat, so you can not use self defence. It really is pretty simple.

And lol at the OP, not giving the facts.

Makes sense lol

.