For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1602645
Flintstone wrote:
Miscellaneous wrote:I very much doubt a GP entering a property on a house call is likely to be mistaken for a couple of scrotes intent in causing harm.




Have you met my GP?

No..., but I've met you and am pretty sure your GP's state on mind when house calling on you is not his/her normal manner. :lol:
Flintstone, Nick liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1602647
IANAL, but I'm guessing that in England&Wales [sic]:

- if someone dies apparently as a result of a physical encounter with another person who can be readily identified, then a Police Officer has little choice but to 'arrest on suspicion of murder', with an appropriate Caution

- if 'suspect' then, under Caution, and if 'fit for interview', and with a lawyer present if requested, gives under interview and signs an account which leads Arresting Officer or later Investigating Officer to surmise both that they are no risk to themselves nor others, nor a flight risk, nor likely to have charges referred by CPS (who may be consulted), then the 'suspect' may be released on 'Police Bail' pending final CPS decision

So, without preempting and CPS decision nor (if charges are laid) any subsequent Plea or Verdict, it seems to me that events as reported suggest that Police have done nothing wrong, nor do I presume to judge whether 'suspect' has.
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1602654
From the BBC report:
The CPS and police urge people to always call the police first - if you are able.
But according to official guidance, anyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves.
As a general rule, the more extreme the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence.
The law doesn't require you to wait to be attacked before using defensive force, but does not protect you if, for example, your action is over-the-top or calculated revenge.
You are given greater protection under the law if force is used to protect yourself or others when dealing with a burglar or trespasser on your property.
The CPS says if you have acted in reasonable self-defence, as described above, and the intruder dies you will still have acted lawfully. :thumleft:
User avatar
By rf3flyer
#1602671
I tend to agree with John Stalker, remember him, who once said in interview that in his opinion "if someone climbs through your window in the middle of the night he leaves most of his rights outside".
Nick liked this
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1602675
rf3flyer wrote:I tend to agree with John Stalker, remember him, who once said in interview that in his opinion "if someone climbs through your window in the middle of the night he leaves most of his rights outside".

I do remember him, but would question his use of most.
By cockney steve
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1602702
Hope he gets his meals served with a tablecloth and a glass of beer. (some Plod do have a sense of right and a sense of humour)
Hope the judge grants him an award from Public Funds for his courage and public -spiritedness, attempting to make a citizen's arrest.

He's obviously a member of the Tony Martin appreciation society. :twisted:
Chris Martyr, Spooky liked this
By Spooky
#1602762
OCB wrote:
I've often pondered about "familiarisation" courses for Judges/Lawyers etc where highly trained specialists (e.g ex-military or whatever) put them through very realistic simulations of real attack scenarios, and see how they fare.


Definitely, however even these scenarios are nothing like the real experience. I did a little security training (as well as the rest of the staff) when I worked in pubs/clubs because we had issues most weeks with various customers. The reality of someone attacking you is far different to a simulation in a classroom, as is the reaction from those involved.

I think the trouble is that the legal system apply a theory scenario to reality. If someone is defending their family, how on Earth are they going to know when to stop and what is too much? Unless highly trained in self defence, people will just go for it until the threat is no more. There needs to be a lot more sympathy and understanding with the emotions/actions of the homeowner rather than wanting to punish them for engaging in simple self-preservation.
User avatar
By OCB
#1602847
Spooky - thanks. You are confirming exactly what I am talking about.

I have, through initially bad fortune and then many years of hard graft, a very clear understanding of the dynamics of physical assault and a bit of how the British legal and policing frameworks deal with the “it” of assault.

First fact is, that as a young British male, you have much less respect from all levels of the legal systems than any other category .

Policing, but much more the judicial systems, have for a very long time treated male “yoof v yoof” as a victimless crime until it gets to criminal (as in permanent damage or death) levels.

That leaves a huge training ground for scrotes to pick on “IB” (innocent bystanders),and the implicit understanding that as a young law abiding male that neither plod nor the courts will give sh.. whether you live or die.

I, and many of my close friends, grew up like that.

If you have ever seen one of your closest mates - as in young teenage - in a hospital bed so badly beaten that his own mother didn’t recognise him, you’ll know what I mean.

Someone beaten with brick in the face until unconscious , then beaten some more by grown men for no other reason than “fun”.

Random, male on male violence.

Cops and courts treat it as “minor assault”. Reality is months of severe disability (as in drinking from a straw, failed his high school exams - appeal refused), then years of physical and - even worse - psychological - trauma to deal with.

If anyone could see me right now, and I know the likes of Ghengis will understand, I actually feel physically sick to explain these things. I feel very uncomfortable talking about it.


That is the reality of getting into a “fight”.

The “law” on this respect - like war - doesn’t decide who is right, just who is left.

As I said earlier- I’d never pre-empt how I’d react to a couple of young. armed intruders in my home.

One thing is 100% clear. Anything I did do, within a very broad concept of “reason”, would be civilised. No hard damage on an incapacitated aggressor after I had time to collect my emotions.

I have found myself in a police cell though, after knocking the seven shades of sh.. out of a collection of scrotes, then having to spend several hours desperately trying to recall WTF I did (in a cell, in the physical states of shock, knowing I had done life changing damage to at least 1 person), then spend days/weeks torturing myself that my response was appropriate and proportional to the situation.

Do I feel bad about what I did? A bit, yeah. At not one single point was I the aggressor though.

*several hours after posting this /to many maybe an irrelevant point, but on that occasion the courts also found me totally innocent.

My primal, and tbh complete cnut, self did well not to kill anyone that time. I did as much damage as my training dictated, even though when I think back I was entirely justified in slabbing the b*stards.

It wasn’t the first or last time either. I have the ghosts of 4 men on my tab.

Now? I have neither the currency nor reactions to do “minimal damage”. Some fark wit tries it on, I give it my best, but reality is I’m the one paying hospital bills
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7