78 pensioner arrested for fatally stabbing burglar in his own home

[SShaming]

2 burglars break into a 78 year old man’s home armed with screwdriver.

Forces owner into the kitchen whilst one of them goes upstairs.

A fight ensues, leaving pensioner with injuries to his arm and burglary is fatally stabbed. Perhaps with his own screwdriver although this is TBC.

Police arrest pensioner.

On what planet is this right?

trespassing and threatening your property or your family by being there is plenty.

Except it isn't. I am glad we don't live in a country where you can decide and deliver any punishment you like to anyone you find on your property - there should still be a test of reasonableness, rather than an assumption I can just murder anyone I find.

An arrest doesn't really mean anything.

I've been arrested before (mistaken probable cause). An hour or two later I was released with an apology and offer of a lift to where I needed to be.

I've been interviewed under caution a few times (due to my job) too. Again, the police were fair and acting properly and I have as much faith in them now as I did before.

As none of us have the details that the police do, I suspect that the right thing is happening to this man.

We have the right to defend ourselves and others and property with reasonable force. Anyone who thinks Tony Martin was innocent either doesn't understand the law or the details of the case. The reduction of his prosecution from murder to manslaughter was not due to whether the force he used was reasonable.

78 year olds can commit terrible crimes.

Until I know a lot more about the case and he is charged and prosecuted (not simply arrested) I think it's unreasonable to have a problem with the actions of the police.

frankchickens
I don't think TabbyMack meant it that way. I had to read it twice too.

They meant "any old person" i.e. any random person not "any OLD person" referring to age.

jen Where have you heard that?

Really struggling to understand a lot of people’s thinking here. How could it ever be wrong for the Police to investigate a death they have discovered?

but what is proportionate force? Are we supposed to wait to see what injury we get before being able to reply? How do you guess if the criminal has a knife, a gun, will rape you, stab you, murder your kids or just grab a handbag and run?

I believe the test in law is did the person take actions which the average person would consider reasonable.

Of course legal bods can spend months trying to decide which side of the line a particular action falls.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude

Good shout, thanks for the clarification.

It certainly wouldn’t be up to the average PC to make that decision as they attend a call.

So a formal interview is needed with legal support and the CPS will decide whether to prosecute. The police gather the facts as best they can.

This article says one of the intruders went upstairs and also that the homeowner sustained injuries. I've not seen anything about a wife though.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/04/suspected-burglar-dies-tussle-pensioner-78/amp/

The test for self defence is complex in as much as there is a subjective element and an objective element. So, in simple terms I think the force has to be objectively reasonable in the context of the threat the individual subjectively believed they were facing.

So if the individual believed their life was in danger or that of third party (even if in fact this was a mistaken belief) it would be reasonable for them to use much greater force in self defence.

Obviously it's more nuanced than this and each case is considered on its facts.

'Stupid rules' = the fucking rule of law. The thing that says burglary is wrong in the first place. The law is not a joke, it's your only protection. When my husband had bled to death on the kitchen floor with me upstairs, the police had to start off by investigating. I wouldn't expect anything less. Yes I'm an easy-going leftie. Oddly enough the police didn't check my fucking voting intentions because voting for a party other than UKIP isn't a criminal offence. They applied the law.

I can't even comprehend how anyone would pretend it's wrong to shoot a burglar in the back when you are put in such a horrendous situation.

I’m not pretending. It is wrong to shoot someone who is running away and not threatening you. You’d have to be a violent nutter to think otherwise IMO.

We have the right to defend ourselves and others and property with reasonable force.

which is actually decided long after the event

For all the froth here, it's worth remembering that there have been cases where intruders have been killed by the homeowner, with no action taken ...

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/260562/CLEARED-MAN-WHO-KILLED-A-BURGLAR

(can't think why the uppercase was needed. It's the Express)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-england-manchester-15211250

and here - despite the fact it was an illegally held weapon, self defence was accepted.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/11/reclusive-pensioner-did-nothing-necessary-shot-dead-burglar/

This last case is of most import to me ... my DW is wheelchair bound (we'll overlook the time she knocked out a guy trying to steal her wheelchair) and therefore extremely vulnerable. If we were to be broken into, my only concern would be to ensure she was safe - and I don't want to be judged on that 6 months later.)

The police need to investigate. They can't just take his word for it that he was being burgled.

If the men in his house were burglars and if he was cornered and threatened and if the stabbing was accidental or a last resort in fear of his life then he absolutely should be released without charge.

I could be wrong, but I don't think you're legally required to to wait until you've been cornered before you fight back against someone who's broken into your home - by that point, it might be too late, anyway. I'm pretty sure breaking into someone's home is automatically considered threatening behaviour. You don't know if they're there to steal something or to rape and murder you and your family. They could be off their head on cocaine for all you know. Being attacked is an occupational hazard of burgling houses.

There was a thread on here a few years ago about a burglar who was stabbed with their own knife. One poster said that the homeowner shouldn't have assumed that the burglar was a threat - he might only have been carrying the knife for self-defence against a "violent homeowner". That still sticks in my mind as one of the most mind-boggling justifications I've ever read!

I am glad we don't live in a country where you can decide and deliver any punishment you like to anyone you find on your property

Who is talking about punishment?
We are talking about random, completely untrained citizens who suddenly find themselves in a very traumatic situation, who in panic will act in completely unpredictable way, and might end up injuring someone if they are lucky, or end up in hospital or the morgue if they are not so lucky.

I am not talking about trapping burglars and torturing them for weeks! That would be unreasonable. A bullet in self defense is perfectly reasonable.

Shooting a burglar whilst you are in panic is not murder, that's the point. People do completely random things in accidents or in traumatic situation, it's exactly the same when they are under uninvited thread. Stabbing someone is even harder, I feel so sorry for the poor guy who had to be in such close contact.

I wouldn't even blame a trained person to react with force to an intruder, once again they cannot guess what is reasonable force and they shouldn't have to risk their life and the life of their family to find out.

And all the weeping hearts on here, bear in mind you have no real idea how you would behave if you honestly felt your family or your life were in danger.

I believe I would act as the man in this story did. I would also expect to be arrested for it..

It is wrong to shoot someone who is running away and not threatening you.

But what if they are running away in order to threaten someone else ?

Are we moving from self-defence to necessity ?

From reading this thread I can infer that people who believe in due process of law are 'lefties', 'bleeding hearts' and 'woolly liberals'.

I can also conclude that a significant proportion of people believe everything they read no matter how unsubstantiated or even total shit it may be.

Finally I can see clearly that a lot of folk would far rather live somewhere like the Phillipines where President Dutarte has given the police carte blanche to shoot perceived criminals and drug dealers dead on the streets with absolute impunity. Because that would be a really good way to live wouldn't it? Dutarte has even admitted to having committed murders himself. Great! If only our woolly liberal bleeding heart navel gazing communist leftie politicians and police would dump all this human rights/civil rights/due process/habeus corpus bollocks and just start indiscriminately murdering crims. Fuckin' A.

If only our woolly liberal bleeding heart navel gazing communist leftie politicians and police would dump all this human rights/civil rights/due process/habeus corpus bollocks and just start indiscriminately murdering crims

The family of Jean Charles de Menezes might not have the same view of UK law and order ...

It is wrong to shoot someone who is running away and not threatening you. You’d have to be a violent nutter to think otherwise IMO.

We are not talking about someone deciding to shoot another human being whilst having a cup of tea, then getting up, grabbing his gun and shooting a bullet. What you are completely missing out if the circumstances where someone is terrified, under threat and extreme panic will react instinctively.

Fine, it's easy to say it's wrong from the comfort of your sofa, but when you are in the middle of it, shit happens. You don't want to be shot, don't burglar people, it's not that hard.

Some people can't even remember their own name when they have just been in an accident! The context of stress should really not be ignored, it's not fair and it's not right.

Fucking hell some threads on MN are like wandering in to the comments for The Sun newspaper.

Bloody hell, that was spooky. I was thinking almost exactly the same and your post was the next one I read, UncleNugget

I agree its terrible. It's an area where people have been killed by intruders.

Sorry I've not read the thread but this is nothing like the Tony Martin case. He had an illegally held fire arm, he shot in to the darkness and again at the retreating backs of the burglars as they tried to escape, and also had previous for shooting at someone's car. This is nothing like that

ikeep One thing to consider that in the UK firearm license holders are required to have firearms locked away. If a person has the time to get the keys, unlock the cabinet, load a firearm then shoot a persons then they will have to prove their actions were justified.

That takes time wher they could have escaped or called the police.

the Tony Martin case.

I vaguely recall all the papers going very quiet as the details emerged and he was obviously more in the wrong than right.