[News] Hither Green 'burglar' stabbing: Man, 78, arrested

[Thunder Bolt]

Not disagreeing, but could very much differ as to whose home was being invaded, (speaking from experience here too, a few times!)

Edit. Sorry, my circumstances were very different, as always came home to find my place robbed, rather than wake to an intruder

I stood there saying stupidly, What are you doing in my kitchen?

The police assured me that most intruders/burglars run away as they're mainly cowards.

 

[happypig]

Self-defence is not a good plea for this case.
" I though I was going to be killed and i'm not sure what happened next, I just felt that i was going to die" is better. As soon as you start talking about 'self defence' the law kicks in and considers your cognitive thought process. Don't go there. Heard this from OB.

Which is almost certainly why he was arrested; he would, before any interview, be entitled to consult a solicitor who would ensure he would not incriminate himself.

A man has died and the police have to conduct a full, proper and unbiased investigation, no matter what their first thought may be.

Given the facts so far, I'll not shed a tear for the burglar and I'm willing to bet the old lad isn't charged.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yeah and he is the only one? Just because he has a public story does not make him unique!

I am female, and was explaining what happened to me. Anger wasn't my first reaction, not even my third reaction.

 

[The Rivet]

I am female, and was explaining what happened to me. Anger wasn't my first reaction, not even my third reaction.

I don't care if your female, trans, identifying as or anything else to be honest.

 

[Weststander]

I don't care if your female, trans, identifying as or anything else to be honest.

Isn’t there a point that a male confident in his aggressive side, would be more likely to be angry and physical on discovering a burglar?

 

[vegster]

By the look of many of the posts here, obviously the entire judicial system is wrong. So, are we happy to go back to an Eye for an Eye then everyone? No problem with that then everyone?

Or do we stick with a judicial system that may not be perfect and is still being updated as work in progress, that which presumes innocent until guilty or go straight to the stoning and save some cash and appease the mob?

Only asking, like?

 

[The Rivet]

Isn’t there a point that a male confident in his aggressive side, would be more likely to be angry and physical on discovering a burglar?

Oh, in the age of women can do anything...lol Like fight on the front line. Bollocks! In the age of parity men should not be seen as superior to the female in aggressive behaviour or that is how the PC brigade want it.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I don't care if your female, trans, identifying as or anything else to be honest.

That much is obvious. My signature is too.

 

[Weststander]

Oh, in the age of women can do anything...lol Like fight on the front line. Bollocks!

We’re digressing.

I’m fine with the lowlife not making it, as nasty as some might find that, but I can understand why passive people including most females would completely freeze on discovering an intruder.

 

[The Rivet]

We’re digressing.

I’m fine with the lowlife not making it, as nasty as some might find that, but I can understand why passive people including most females would completely freeze on discovering an intruder.

Passive women? They are males equivalents today, are they not?

 

[The Rivet]

What do you say Thunder Bolt, are you an alpha males equivalent?

 

[The Rivet]

The validity of my earlier questions remain. When does fighting back become assault in your own property?

 

[Crispy Ambulance]

By the look of many of the posts here, obviously the entire judicial system is wrong. So, are we happy to go back to an Eye for an Eye then everyone? No problem with that then everyone?

Or do we stick with a judicial system that may not be perfect and is still being updated as work in progress, that which presumes innocent until guilty or go straight to the stoning and save some cash and appease the mob?

Only asking, like?

The judicial system needs to get a move on and recognise that, when someone makes the choice to enter a property which is not theirs, they lose all common and criminal law rights assigned to them had they not made that choice and that any subsequent action undertaken against them is outside of common or criminal law. Simples!

 

[Weststander]

The validity of my earlier questions remain. When does fighting back become assault in your own property?

It seems when they’re running away and you shoot them. Anything else is fair game?

 

[The Rivet]

It seems when they’re running away and you shoot them. Anything else is fair game?

As in the Martin case. It was an eye opener in Spain when we had been burgled. The old bill basically said if you beat them, injure them or anything else, just make sure they are off your property limits!

 

[drew]

The judicial system needs to get a move on and recognise that, when someone makes the choice to enter a property which is not theirs, they lose all common and criminal law rights assigned to them had they not made that choice and that any subsequent action undertaken against them is outside of common or criminal law. Simples!

Hopefully your day job isn't a law maker!! You sound right out of camp Trump!!

 

[clapham_gull]

The judicial system needs to get a move on and recognise that, when someone makes the choice to enter a property which is not theirs, they lose all common and criminal law rights assigned to them

Fancy re-reading that ?

 

[The Rivet]

Hopefully your day job isn't a law maker!! You sound right out of camp Trump!!

Really? Sounds imminently sensible to me. You step outside the law and everyone should be able to defend themselves. You should not be protected by law when you are breaking the law per see.

 

[clapham_gull]

You should not be protected by law when you are breaking the law per see.

You can shoot someone if they are smoking a spliff ?

I recall much debate over the Tony Martin case and whether the law should be changed. Turns out the law is ok and there are next to no prosecutions for someone attacking someone who has entered their property to steal things.

Why ?

Because this happens so rarely in this country and juries are generally sympathetic when it does happen, if it ever gets to court.

The Tony Martin case is very very different if you can be bothered to read up on it.

 

[Crispy Ambulance]

Fancy re-reading that ?

No, why if the decision to enter is unlawful?