Wouldn’t be surprised if the farmer spends a few years at his majesty’s pleasure.
Potential Tony Martin 2.0.
But we will see what the facts of the case are in the end and see what happens from there.
IIRC the one thing you're not meant to do in the UK is use your licenced guns for "self defence". If they're stored properly you shouldn't be able to get to them as a first resort.
From memory you're not even meant to have the ammunition and the guns in the same place and they are both meant to be stored in locked cases, which means the only time you should have a gun and ammo "to hand" is if you're actively planning on using them, or transporting them to and from a place where they will be used (IIRC stored in the boot of your vehicle, probably locked in an approved secured case for many types).
IIRC the police give a pretty much automatic fast response to any address with registered guns, in part to reduce the risk of them getting into the wrong hands during a break in.
I don't get this obsession with not hurting them if they're turning to flee. How tf would you know if they were making an escape, or heading to another part of your house where your kids are, or to regroup outside before coming back to attack you again?
Blast first, ask questions later should be ok when someone threatening or dangerous has entered your property.
Because it means that you can basically kill anyone you want and claim "they were a threat".
The law operates on facts, evidence and probabilities, not "maybe's".
However the law also tends to work on the principle that you really have to go massively over the top, or demonstrate you went far beyond what could ever reasonably be defined as "self defence" to get found guilty, if just because in any such trial the prosecution have to get a jury of 12 normal people to agree that you went over the top.
It's telling that in the last 30 odd years there has only IIRC been a handful on instances where a Jury has thought that, and the only two I can think of off the top of my head were Tony Martin with an illegal gun, traps, shooting someone in the bank and not calling the police, and the group of vigilantes that formed up after the fact and went out and hunted the person who'd tried attacking/breaking into one of their properties and murdered him on the street in front of dozens of witnesses who were pleading with them to stop.
Meanwhile a guy who used a speargun (kept in his broom cupboard by the front door, with his other diving gear) to stop the person that was trying to break his door down whilst threatening him was found not guilty. And IIRC Kennith Noye back in the 80's persuaded a jury that upon seeing suspicious activity in his garden he went out and stabbed a guy multiple times and it was self defence (the guy he killed was a police officer), however that same defence didn't work for him when he did it again a few years later to a motorist in broad daylight in a "road rage" attack.
Also and this is a key thing, you will tend to find it hard to argue "I was in fear for my life" when you're actively prolonging the encounter and thus threat by say following someone, or going after them once they're trying to get out a window.
As I say it's amazing how far you have to go for a Jury of 12 normal people to find you guilty if it's a death involving someone that tried to break into your property.
youtu.be
