Intruder killed

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Horrible for all involved, and the third time someone has been stabbed and killed in the same area over the past few months.
 
beighton155 said:
The mail will have a field day if he gets done.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. They'll doubtless overreact without knowing any of the facts around the case. They always do. That said, defending one's home should not be something one has to hesitate over for fear of being prosecuted. The moment you decide to break the law by entering someone else's house uninvited you should expect serious consequences. In short, **** him. He's dead because he put himself in a situation where someone was likely to resist. Chances are he's just got what was coming to him.
 
I'm usually against all sorts of excessive violence even when it's seen as "justified" by others, but when you enter someone's property with a knife you are taking certain risks which I am sure the intruder was aware of. I would let the houseowner go if I were the judge.

Ah, BM got there first.
 
Last edited:
Blue Maniac said:
Absolutely. They'll doubtless overreact without knowing any of the facts around the case. They always do. That said, defending one's home should not be something one has to hesitate over for fear of being prosecuted. The moment you decide to break the law by entering someone else's house uninvited you should expect serious consequences. In short, **** him. He's dead because he put himself in a situation where someone was likely to resist. Chances are he's just got what was coming to him.
Click to expand...

Isn't that pretty much what the justice secretary said he was going to introduce? It opens up a lot of avenues for misuse if it does, which is ashamed because you should be able to defend what is yours.
 
beighton155 said:
Isn't that pretty much what the justice secretary said he was going to introduce? It opens up a lot of avenues for misuse if it does, which is ashamed because you should be able to defend what is yours.
Click to expand...
I think there has to be some sort of limit to what lengths you can go to. If you were to tie someone up and beat and starve him for several days, or chase someone for a mile with a bat before smashing his brains out, you could probably expect to get a visit from the police. If the intruder gets stabbed in the neck in the heat of the moment though, tough shit.
 
Blue Maniac said:
I think there has to be some sort of limit to what lengths you can go to. If you were to tie someone up and beat and starve him for several days, or chase someone for a mile with a bat before smashing his brains out, you could probably expect to get a visit from the police. If the intruder gets stabbed in the neck in the heat of the moment though, tough shit.
Click to expand...

it would need to be very clearly defined. It would be easy enough to find someone I don't like and stab them outside my front door as they walked past and say he was trying to break in. The limits would have to be inside the property IMO. I also worry how you would show that you were simply defending yourself and not attacking them with the intention to kill.
 
Last edited:
Blue Maniac said:
I think there has to be some sort of limit to what lengths you can go to. If you were to tie someone up and beat and starve him for several days, or chase someone for a mile with a bat before smashing his brains out, you could probably expect to get a visit from the police. If the intruder gets stabbed in the neck in the heat of the moment though, tough shit.
Click to expand...

I think that pretty much is the law atm, which I think is correct. There's a big difference between shooting someone in the back as they run from your premises, to an individual stabbing in the heat of the moment, and hopefully justice will be done here either way.
 
beighton155 said:
I also worry how you would show that you were simply defending yourself and not attacking them with the intention to kill.
Click to expand...

I think that just comes down to individual cases, as it would if a 'self-defence' death happened outside the home. Factors such as number of wounds and where the wounds were inflicted make it somewhat easier to establish.
 
Reasonable force is a matter for a jury to decide, should it ever come to it. I'm guessing most jurors would find a person not guilty of murder/manslaughter in such circumstances, whatever directions the trial judge gives.

The concept also does include the principles BM has alluded to, but there is no actual guideline setting it in stone. Whilst I agree there needs to be clarity, the problem with being too specific is there is the danger of someone falling foul of the law when they probably did act reasonably in those particular circumstances. If that makes sense.
 
Leesoh said:
.The concept also does include the principles BM has alluded to, but there is no actual guideline setting it in stone. Whilst I agree there needs to be clarity, the problem with being too specific is there is the danger of someone falling foul of the law when they probably did act reasonably in those particular circumstances. If that makes sense.
Click to expand...
Another problem is the potential for someone to tool themselves up with 'acceptable' weaponry for just such an occasion and planning to kill someone and subsequently claim it was done within the law.
 
Blue Maniac said:
Another problem is the potential for someone to tool themselves up with 'acceptable' weaponry for just such an occasion and planning to kill someone and subsequently claim it was done within the law.
Click to expand...

Isn't it a shame that if, as a species, we weren't such ****s we wouldn't even need to consider what to do in these circumstances?
 
beighton155 said:
Isn't it a shame that if, as a species, we weren't such ****s we wouldn't even need to consider what to do in these circumstances?
Click to expand...

The real shame is that these circumstances ever occur.
 
Blue Maniac said:
Another problem is the potential for someone to tool themselves up with 'acceptable' weaponry for just such an occasion and planning to kill someone and subsequently claim it was done within the law.
Click to expand...

Ture. I hope we don't look to our friends across the Atlantic for help and advice on this....

I'm surprised it hasn't been suggested that the principle of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria]volenti non fit injuria[/url] should apply to criminal matters though.
 
Leesoh said:
I'm surprised it hasn't been suggested that the principle of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria]volenti non fit injuria[/url] should apply to criminal matters though.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what BM suggested in post #4?
 
beighton155 said:
That was my point.
Click to expand...

In that case I got confused over the use of two instances of the same word "we" referring to two separate sub-groups of the species.
 
spionfox said:
Never mind that Mr Mod - why didn't you fix her link?!!

Here it is!
Click to expand...


Already knowing the meaning of the phrase, I had no need to click on the link and therefore did not know it was faulty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool1128
2Manchester C  1123
3Chelsea1119
4Arsenal1119
5Nottm F1119
6Brighton1119
7Fulham1118
8Newcastle1118
9Aston Villa1118
10Tottenham 1116
11Brentford1116
12Bournemouth1115
13Manchester U1115
14West Ham1112
15Leicester1110
16Everton1110
17Ipswich118
18Palace117
19Wolves116
20Southampton114

Latest posts

Back
Top