Ridiculously out of touch judge.

[User removed 4]

Correct - I realised when I read it back, that it was open to misinterpretation - and was proved right.

Just to clarify for the simple folk; Yes, SIMSTER has been to a WHOPPING one game at Withdean this season, and yes, I like an argument.

I dont believe you, simster is a "real football man" hes told me so himself, hes also a dyed in the wool albion fan, he's even got an albion mug that he drinks out of at work ffs

 

[pork pie]

I must say I was up for slagging another old fool of a Judge off - until I read the details!

These two deserve to be locked up! (and so does the criminal) - where the f*** do they think they are carrying on like that? f***ing Bagdad? It would have been one thing giving the guys a kicking if he was still at the house, but he was not and they simply beat the guy up as some form of third world justice!

 

[Huple]

They broke the cricket bat ? Thats bad.................Must have been a pretty poor bat then. I`d trust my old Grey and Nicholls against any hard headed burglar any day. If you middle any robbers with a G and N they stay hit and your bat just purrs.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I want to know what make of cricket bat it was. I need a new one for next season and don't want to waste time purchasing a 'splitter'.

 

[clapham_gull]

I agree with Bushy, the law is an arse. The intruder, who has lots of "previous" tied up his family, but broke free and hit the intruder with a cricket bat -GOOD ON HIM - the intruder gets a SUSPENDED SENTENCE, the defender gets jailed.

In my world, if you break into someone else's property - YOU GET WHAT IS COMING TO YOU - perhaps then, they will think twice about doing it.

This is what the judge said :-

"However, if persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse."

Which is BOLLOCKS, - letting justice take it's course - the bloke was given a SUSPENDED SENTENCE - where is the justice in that ? Clearly even jail isn't a sufficient deterrent, getting bashed with a cricket bat - now that might just work !

Fortunately the reality is much different.

It's highly unusual for someone to get done after someone else has broken into their house, even if they've wacked them with a cricket bat.

Juries are quite good at including sports equipment with the definition of reasonable force. Where they tend to draw the line is in cases like the above or shooting someone dead as they are running away.

I know a few solicitors who get a bit annoyed by the reaction to cases like this, as they are the ones that always make the papers and people lap them up as if law has been taken over by idiots.

It hasn't.

It's only in very exceptional cases like this where the powers that be need to send out a message that it's down to the Police and The Criminal Justice System to enforce the law.

Personally I think an automatic custodial sentence should apply in cases of burglary.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I'm wading into this one a bit late but for what it's worth:

I do feel a bit sorry for the bloke being sent down. At the end of the day he didn't ask for someone to break into his house and tie up his family. Had that not happened he would be enjoying his life as usual.

BUT he obviously went way over the top with the beating. Reasonable force is knocking the thieving pikey scumbag out until the OB turn up. You can't just allow people to repeatedly smash someone in the head whilst they're on the ground unconscious resulting in brain damage.

The whole thing is very unfortunate, however for me the biggest failing in the criminal justice system is not this case in particular, but the fact that the burgler had 54 previous convictions, why was he not locked up already?

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

" Personally I think an automatic custodial sentence should apply in cases of burglary. "

In the burglary case I 'tried' last year it did, a mandatory 3 year sentence, it being the defendants third conviction ( with about 16 other offences 'taken into consideration' ), and committed whilst ( he was supposed to be ) wearing an electronic tag.

 

[The Spanish]

i am so pleased the bloke is f***ing brain damaged its not true.

the moment he bust into that house and tied those poor people up the law had already failed them. no point claiming the moral high ground after the event no matter how legally correct it may be.

no point claiming that by default you are approving of other vigilantiism either. Homes should be off limits.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

BBC News - Burglar attacker's appeal fails