Reasonable Force Self Defence

D D Danneh · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:04

It's a tough one. On one hand, there wasn't anything else he could have done to save his son, yet on the other, was there really a need to stab the kid 5 times?

Personally, I think he should be let off. He had to choose between his son dying, or stabbing a bunch of yobs. I know what I'd choose, and the one who got stabbed survived anyway, so clearly what he tried to do, worked. Instead of one innocent man dying, no-one died.

Buffman · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:04

etom said:
and you think the average 60 year old (guessing the age of the step dad) shares the same view as you?

Probably not I'd consider similar if my family was in danger, doesn't make it reasonable force.

Morba · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:06

manic111 said:
Reasonable force is enough force to stop whatever is happening, without going beyond what you need to do. If for example this guy needed to stab somebody once to stop him vandalising the van, then stabbing him once is reasonable force. Stabbing him five times is not.

no court in this land will accept stabbing someone as reasonable for vandalising a van.

More on topic, going back into the house and getting the knife is bad news. He will go down for that, unfortunately

XPE · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:06

According to the article after the father came out the house with the knife and they tried to attack him, its not like the father charge them, what was the guy expecting to happen and he just kicked the guy's son to the ground ?

^TANK^ · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:06

The Craig said:
Probably not I'd consider similar if my family was in danger, doesn't make it reasonable force.

I would agree if it was 1 on 1, but five jumped up little turds come off it.

Rroff · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:07

I wouldn't lay an ounce of blame if he'd killed every single one of them any more tbh - these low life scum need to be taught a lesson... I bet they get off with hardly any punishment while an innocent man gets dragged through the courts and his life ruined...

JBuk · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:07

Without knowing the exact sequence of events it's hard to say if the force was justified

the 16yr old could have been in a frenzy for all we know and didn't stop attacking until the 5th wound which is justified imo, but it could have been the other way round which isn't justified

Jokester · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:07

scorza said:
Course they should investigate it, something like this I imagine:

Police: "Ok Mr Philpotts, what happened?"
Mr Philpotts: "I was attacked by these five youths as they were vandalising my van outside my home and beating my son. I fought them off with my letter opener which I keep near the front door and unfortunately during the scuffle one of them got stabbed five times"
Police: "I see, well we know where you live, we'll be in touch when we need your testimony in court against these five ruffians".

You know, maybe the police could think about actual justice a bit before just going for the easy arrest to meet their targets.

And what if that wasn't actually what happened and he then disappears? The police have to gather evidence before picking "sides".

^TANK^ · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:08

Morba said:
no court in this land will accept stabbing someone as reasonable for vandalising a van.

More on topic, going back into the house and getting the knife is bad news. He will go down for that, unfortunately

Pretty sure he grabbed the knife to protect his wife and stepson.

Sutters · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:09

Should the yobs be charged with attempted murder? Sounds like the were probably going to stomp his son to death. He probably should have used a bat, but he obviously had no time to think.

shauncr91 · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:09

Just a shame he didn't kill the little brat.

If any criminal charges are brought upon him then that's a disgrace.

scorza · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:12

Jokester said:
And what if that wasn't actually what happened and he then disappears? The police have to gather evidence before picking "sides".

Well yes I was being pithy, obviously there's a bit more to it than that. However no need to actually arrest him on suspicion of attempted murder unless there's actually some suspicion that he did attempt to murder one of the assailants.

Jokester · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:14

scorza said:
Well yes I was being pithy, obviously there's a bit more to it than that. However no need to actually arrest him on suspicion of attempted murder unless there's actually some suspicion that he did attempt to murder one of the assailants.

One of them was stabbed 5 times

semi-pro waster · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:14

Teki187 said:
I know its the Sun, but still.

On the subject of the quality of reporting - what does the price of their house have to do with the price of cheese? Sun reporting extraneous facts while possibly not giving salient ones.

Teki187 said:
First off do you class what he did as reasonable force in regards to self defence?

It's a debatable point, largely because he returned for a weapon - I suspect if it had gone to a jury he would have been let off with it as it is an understandable reaction when facing large odds but strictly speaking the act of returning for the weapon moves if from the aspect of defending yourself with the first implement that comes to hand to a more premeditated action as that suggests a certain clarity of thought.

Teki187 said:
Second if he only stabbed once, would that change your perception of the incident?

It might. It would depend on what was the minimum force required to incapacitate the assailant or render them to be no longer a threat.

Teki187 said:
Third off, what do you personally class as reasonable force when it comes to self defence?

It varies according to the individual instance - what would be reasonable in one situation might be patently not so in another even if the facts were broadly the same.

However as a general rule reasonable force in a self defence context to me means that you can take the action necessary to protect yourself but not more than that and certainly not into the level of meting out your own brand of 'justice' on someone who has the temerity to attack you.

scorza · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:17

Jokester said:
One of them was stabbed 5 times

Malice aforethought?

Buffman · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:19

Sutters said:
Should the yobs be charged with attempted murder? Sounds like the were probably going to stomp his son to death. He probably should have used a bat, but he obviously had no time to think.

Well obviously it depends how much they where hurting him, but they're far more at fault than the dad.

^TANK^ said:
Pretty sure he grabbed the knife to protect his wife and stepson.

I think that a knife wouldn't protect them though, just cause harm to one of them while the 4 others either run away leaving you in a bad situation or the other 4 would still come at you, overpower you and then take "revenge".

Jokester · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:20

scorza said:
Malice aforethought?

Which would need to be established or not via an investigation.

Morgoth · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:22

Hmm, interesting case. There was no doubt that the guy would rush to the aid of his child but when it's 5 vs 1 I can see grabbing a weapon to be a reasonable defensive manoeuvre, if the youths charge the father who is wielding a weapon and they get struck with it then more fool them.

markweatherill · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:23

There's some sub-editing happening to the lady's quotes. 'In the blink of an eye' indeed!

scorza · 27 Jul 2009 at 21:24

Jokester said:
Which would need to be established or not via an investigation.

Here's a thought, why not investigate the facts before going around announcing you suspect people of attempted murder. The guy in the article wasn't a flight risk, why arrest him?