Reasonable Force Self Defence
- Thread starter Teki187
- Start date
Its my bum scratcher.
Scorza, you have NO concept of criminal procedure in the UK
Yes, looking at the facts from the comfort of the following day and also from the comfort of your armchair its easier to come to a conclusion. When 2 cops turn up to a scene where there are 8 ppl involved (5 neds and the 3 family members) all of whom are fighting or injured parties its a bit different.
These cops have to assess these following facts very very quickly -
1. numerous bodies involved in a stand-up fight.
2. Injured parties already there and in VERY serious conditions.
3. "witnesses" from both sides stating whats happened biased to their own side.
So they have 2 ppl severly injured (the son-in-law and the stab victim) and you have someone identified (inluding self incrimination as he admitted it) as stabbing someone NUMEROUS times.
The cops did the correct thing. He is arrested and then questioned. Beleive it or not, the cops do him a favour here as he has more rights as an arrested person than if he isn't.
He also states that the cops were decent to him and he had no complaints to them indicating that they DID figure out what had happened but do YOU want to be that cop that makes the decision to release someone thats just stabbed someone else multiple times ??
It is NOT the police's decision whether he should be prosecuted or not but I tell you what, if the CPS found out that someone had been stabbed multiple times and the police "let the guy go" they would rip the police a new one....
no that's looking at the guys storey, at this point he could have beaten his son, threatened his wife into silence and stabbed a group of passers by.
the police can not just take one guys word for what happened they need to arrest all involved and investigate properly.
No, not at all many feel the same way you do I keep this by the door for possible problems.
looks like a good idea for a left 4 dead 2 weapon
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Associate
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 668
I don't see the problem with that incident at all; driving a freaking van at someone isn't really appropriate force and no matter whether he "lost it" or not, he's a danger to society as well if that's how he reacts.
Isn't the law on self-defence that you use reasonable force for the situation, so if they have a knife you are 'allowed' a knife etc.
And I agree with the fact that if he didn't have a knife he woulda been on the floor with his son most likely, so what was he supposed to do?
And I agree with the fact that if he didn't have a knife he woulda been on the floor with his son most likely, so what was he supposed to do?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
Should he have his day in court I wholeheartedly hope he walks away a free man.
Exactly... There are always THREE sides to a story including this one -
1. neds side
2. family side
3. TRUTH
All the police want to do at the scene is pick out the apparent biggest offenders which includes the guy holding a bloody letter opener having just stabbed someone so that the situation comes under control and is SAFE for the cops and also assess the injured parties and pass this onto the control room for an ambulance.
but of course if he does the newspapers will never report it.
only if he's convicted will they stick with the storey.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
but of course if he does the newspapers will never report it.
only if he's convicted will they stick with the storey.
I'm not so sure.
He may have acted rashly in hindsight but is it in the public interest or fair to drag him through the courts while a feral group who threatened to kill him and burn his house down walk free as a bird ?
No it isn't.
^^^
this tbh..
you can't stab (i.e. potentially kill someone) while deafening possessions (i.e. his van) - thats not reasonable force by any means.
They were unarmed too - He'd maybe have an argument if 5 youths burst in through his bedroom window in the middle of the night and he grabbed the letter opener in the spur of the moment and lashed out. But consciously grabbing it and running into the street in order to protect a van isn't really going to hold up too well.
but he was defending his son not his van.
I'm analysing the facts as presented in that report. If you are party to some facts on this case that aren't in that report then please feel free to post them here. Until then I will believe that this man is innocent until proven guilty.
ok so you also believe the other 5 guys are innocent to yes?
