A millionaire whose family was held hostage by a knife-wielding burglar and his two accomplices has been jailed for resisting the burglar, who was himself spared prison.
The man, a wealthy 53-year-old businessman, returned to his Buckinghamshire home from a trip to the mosque together with his wife, daughter and two sons to discover three men had broken into their home.
The masked intruders threatened to kill them if they did not submit, and then tied them up. One of the man’s sons managed to get loose, and ran to the nearby residence of his 35-year-old uncle, who came back with him to try to free the rest of their family.
The gang broke and ran, but one of their number, a 56-year-old career criminal, was knocked down in the back garden, where he was beaten severely by the man and his brother. He was subsequently hospitalised with a fractured skull and brain damage.
The father and his brother were subsequently arrested and charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm on the burglar.
The presiding judge sentenced the defendant to 30 months in prison, and gave his brother 39 months in light of the fact that he had faced lesser provocation, accusing the pair of “violent revenge,” and ignoring their defence that the beating had been “taken in the agony of the moment”:
“The attack which then occurred was totally unnecessary and amounted to a very violent revenge attack on a defenceless man.
It may be that some members of the public or media commentators will assert that he deserved what happened to him, and that you should not have been prosecuted and need not be punished.
The courts must make it clear that such conduct is criminal and unacceptable.”
The judge stressed that the rule of law might be seriously imperiled if vigilantes were not jailed whilst criminals walk free:
“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 the criminal justice system take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.”
The injured criminal who broke into his home was chided for a “serious and wicked” attack, but was handed a non-custodial sentence in place of prison. His injuries may qualify him for a disability benefit.
UK law allows victims of violent crime to ‘use no more force than absolutely necessary’ to protect themselves, which in practice can often lead to those who resist and injure criminals facing more serious charges than their assailants…
Via the Daily Mail.
Zero no Tsukaima F Yuri Skinship Anime
Yozora Mikazuki & Sena Kashiwazaki Figures
To Love-Ru Darkness Totally Tentacular
Ano Hana Naruko Anjo Anal Dress Figure
Top 10 Most Followed Seiyuu
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Wondrous As Ever
Ciel nosurge: “Your Date With Ion = $170″
Nisemonogatari – “Where Did All The Ero Go!?”
Police Hunt Ushijima for “Public Indecency”
Cops Bust Cop in Nude BDSM Club Raid
K-ON! “Causes Keionbu Girl Band Boom”
Vippers vs Vankers: 2ch Targets “Korean Propaganda”
Overflow Delays “Final” Game: “We Are Not Going Bankrupt!”
Ritsu Topless Manga Time – “She Has Boobs After All!”
Top 10 Most Boring Anime of Winter 2012
Behold: The ONACOUNTER
Future Diary Unveils Eye-Popping Scenes of Sex & Guro
K-ON! Pilgrims Invade London
Top 10 Essential Anime Elements
Lolicon Teacher Rapes Pupils 37 Times, Faces 30 Years
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Cosplay
“Post The Highest Level Cosplay Ever!”
“Share The Cutest Cosplay Ever”
“Dolls vs Figures – Which is Best?”
“Why Do Girls Always Have Such Cute Rooms!?”
Shoko-tan’s Madoka & Ika-chan Cosplay “Excessively Cute”
Guilty Crown Yuzuriha Inori Cosplay by Sasa
IdolMaster G4U: “Who Needs 3D Idols Now?”
Anegasaki Nene Cosplay by Rinami
Excessive force is excessive.
Policies like this encourage burglary and robbery since criminals know that they won't be resisted against during a home invasion.
You'd be more hesitant to rob someone if they could kill you.
One more reason why never to move to the UK.
Hmmm, so if you go there and loli raep, you get a medal and the loli gets house arrest but in your house?!
I'm in! *buys plane ticket*
The problem here was twofold: they used clearly excessive force, and they did so AFTER the burglar had LEFT the house. That will get you convicted in most any Common Law jurisdiction (Civil Law as well - you might get away with it in Sharia Law areas, though), even in the parts of the U.S. that still hold to the Castle Doctrine. You can use reasonable force (which may even include deadly force, depending on the circumstances and the jurisdiction) to resist an intruder in your home, but pursuing the intruder when he leaves is NOT "resisting" anymore, you are making an attempt to apprehend, and you then must abide by the acceptable means of apprehension. Even the police don't have the right to beat a fleeing suspect to a pulp.
Provocation is only a partial defense: a mitigating factor at sentencing, not a justification.
That said, the fact that the burglar was not treated with more severity by the court is a miscarriage of justice. Once upon a time, burglary was a capital offense. We've sunk pretty low if we're now giving burglars non-custodial sentences.
I agree.
It is one thing for him to defend himself, but as soon as the burglar ran he should have restrained him, not beat him half to death. You're allowed to use force in DEFENSE, and it had stopped being about defense once the burglar tried to escape.
However, on the other side I think it's ridiculous that the burglar got off without prison. Seriously, WTF? Just because he got beaten doesn't let him off the hook.
What if he was fighting them? Are their actions defense? I'd say so. The fact that he was outnumbered is not important--this guy was a violent career criminal and probably could have taken any single one of them. This isn't the boxing ring and Marquis of Queensberry rules.
I can kind of vaguely see not bothering jailing the perp. He's been well-punished and will find it hard to be any further trouble to society. Might as well roll him on home to wet his nappies.
Which is why you catch the burglar, beat him to death, shovel a nice hole in the backyard to bury him and keep it nice and quiet.
well the article says that it was on the owner backyard that in a way its still the victim house because its his property
It doesn't work that way. "House" means the actual structure of the house. Not the front yard, not the back yard, not even the porch. Even where the Castle Doctrine prevails, it doesn't apply outdoors.
The law (even in England) allows reasonable force in defense of self or defense of a third party (though what is considered "reasonable" varies by jurisdiction), but not in defense of property. Unless there is immediate danger to life or limb, the use of force is not justified, because repairing or replacing property can be accomplished through the courts.
Furthermore, the defendants didn't even CLAIM justification. They claimed that they were acting "in the agony of the moment" - in other words, they were asserting the merely MITIGATING circumstance of passion. A mitigating circumstance reduces the gravity of the offense, but it does not excuse it entirely.
Don't get me wrong, I think current English law doesn't allow enough leeway to self-defense (especially in the home), but this simply isn't an example of its deficiency in that regard. This is an example of someone going beyond what is acceptable in civilized society to physically punish someone who had wronged him, rather than allowing the justice system to work.
The judge is completely right that society will break down if we let people exact violent revenge instead of pursuing the proper, legal remedies.
The irony huh? I just had a test on tort law today.
You're obligated to provide for the safety of the people entering your property, licensees and trespassers alike. It's the proper standard of care you need to provide since it's your property and you have to ensure the safety of the people in it as the occupier. Hell, the burglar can even sue for damages.
Civilized indeed.
Yeah, this is why the rule is becoming "shoot, shovel, shut up."
I've never heard that phrase before, but I like it!
I'd never bury someone like that.
I'd put him into a 55-gallon drum, put the top on, unscrew the plug out of the pump-hole, and quietly roll that sucker into the local illegal toxic-waste dump or unused slough.
*Plash!*
*gurgle-gurgle-bloop-bloop-bloop*
Symptom (not root problem) remedied.
Henry VI, part 2:
DICK.
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
JACK CADE.
Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings: but I say, 'tis the bee's wax; for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since.- How now! who's there?
Here in America, if this happens, you get your shotgun and blast that fuckers head off
And about inflicting brain damage.
A hard punch to the temple might be enough to cause brain damage if you hit it hard enough and at the perfect angle.
A trip down the stairs could cause brain damage.
Just because the man's 56 and on the ground doesn't mean the victims should have to give the ass first aid, make him tea, or write an essay on the injustice of him being in his socio economic predicament. Their responsibility is to protect themselves and their families.
not going to log in =.=!/
w/e
tbh at the start they were 3 bulgars if the one with the cracked skull was the unluckiest or well the slowest one and got his arse beaten up its because the other 2 gave him as a scapegoat, if the other 2 came back to help their "comrade" they would be in "imminent" danger and such force should be accepted (you know you want to take them down as fast as possible and at the same time making them un able to stand up again you never know if the other 2 would come back with weapons)
This is why you need Kira.
Spontaneous revenge should be allowed tbh
Yes, welcome to Britain where defending your house against home invasion and your person from harm due to felonious assault is considered to be greater 'crimes' than the commission of the original acts.
It is not like the British cops can do anything about it - not because they (the constables and beat cops.) do not want to protect civilians but because the government has become so tolerant and weak-willed that they can not do anything worthwhile because it might 'oppress' someone or infringe on someone's civil rights. Most of Europe is the same, which is why any European charter of 'human rights' is absolutely worthless.
Societies like that, where the government and intelligensia consider the regular citizen a greater threat than criminals, are not long for this world. Europe is on the path to becoming merely a geographic expression - something you see on a map but does not have any meaning.
ALL HAIL BRITTANIA!!
(Some very small parts of) Britannia Waives the Rules!
Yes. European culture and pessimism has been that way for a good while, including tyrant government and 'peacekeeping.'
One of the contextual reasons there were Amendments to the Bill of Rights almost out the door protecting the 'right to bear arms,' right of 'refusal to quarter troops or militia,' 'illegal search and seizure' and 'right against self-incrimination' to boot.
And yes, when a sense of Human creative potential and optimism regarding Humankind's role and relation in the Universe and in society is lost, and political and cultural revolution don't occur to change that direction... the society is doomed.
Maybe causing brain damage was a little too much by the owner of the house, but you are telling me that the burglar gets to walk away scotch free? I mean, how stupid is this?
Some people freak out under the stress of a fight or a beating.
I heard a 9/11 call where a man threw an outdoors patio table throuh a woman's window and came in with a pistol.
The woman was on the line for a minute or 2 freaking out and telling the operator to come before he comes around the corner and she has to shoot him.
She went off the line and a minute later she was sobbing about how she killed him sounding like she was bawling her eyes out.
Weekend warriors and people who's only experience in a mortal combat is Mortal Kombat never experienced the adrenaline of a life or death situation where anything can happen. The panic and adrenaline could probably have had the people's heads clouded with a million thoughts of what the burglars MIGHT do before the cops get there leading to what to us might be an over the top reaction but to the panicked people was probably to protect their family.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4Z_2oU9B2o
The edited version...the full version runs for 8 or 9 minutes.
The 911 operator tells her it's a good shoot.
Well.. this confirms my suspicions.
Britain is completely And utterly bats to the walls FUCKED Up beyond all compare. The populace lives under a police state government run under the hands of a "jimmy carter" regime of malaise and ignorance.
Aside the fact that the two innocent men where ragheads, I still would say that what they did was not enough. If you threaten my family under the possibility of death. Your end will be close and I think those two didn't do enough and crush that fuckers' head flat before giving chase to the other asspumpers!
It's fuckin easy to judje other's decisions from the side - whether they were rigth or wrong. But it's only untill you are not threatened with knife yourself.
It's like that scene with Bandits vs Pirates in the beginning of One Piece - if you are putting a gun at someone, you should be prepared to get shot.
Here in Brazil, not even a Cop can enter anyone's house without the owner or a judge's permission.
I don't think the criminal should be spared only because he is at a disvantage: it is a risk he has already taken into account. And twenty minutes (or so) after a robbery is not like the house owner has turned into a “vigilante” and is on a vengeance rampage.
P.S.: If a Burglar enters my house, to threaten me, my wife or any friend/relative who might be here, I'll do my best to assure that the only thing he gets here is a bullet in the brain, a knife in the chest or a fracture in the skull.
you know why the crime rate is so low in Isreal?! Because every sons of bitches has a gun in his/her pocket.
Do you also know why the crime rate is rising in UK and big cities like Newyorkcity? It's because people rely on the "police," and citizens are defenseless.
Excessive punishment or vengeance? STFU, what were they suppose to do? Search the UK website for instructions on how to defend yourself?
"Castle Law" is the only reason burglars will think twice about breaking into someone's home.
If you need food, clothing, or money, that's your freaking problem. A millionaire is not responsible for your problems. Let nature selection take its course.
The Monty Python skit, "How to Defend Yourself Against Fresh Fruit", seems appropriate here.
"But what if he's got a pointed stick?"
"Shut up!"
Before I even clicked the link, I thought to myself, "This must have taken place in England." And hey, I was right.
And people wonder why other people vote BNP (or similar parties).
That is, at least, one good thing about some parts of AmeriKKKa- they have what is called "Castle Laws" that immunize people from prosecution if they are defending themselves in their homes.
However, these laws are under constant assault and I fear they'll only last a few more years. The ones who usually try to take them away are Republicans, but they support them during election time, and then turn around and try to credit any removal to Democrats. With a supposed Democrat president (who's centrist and appeasing, at least so far) they are in jeopardy.
"The ones who usually try to take them away are Republicans"
WTF? What color is the sky on your planet?
It's like Veteran's benefits.
During especially wartime, Republican officials fight hard to remove and reduce them. During election time, they claim the support them, pass token one and then blame the Democrats. The thoughtful, sneaky criminal will often accuse others of crimes they themselves commit, which also IMO explains why AmeriKKKan Talk Radio breaks "Godwin's Law" daily many times. They'll lie all they want and people like you will lap it up like mutant rats drinking toilet water.
I was going to make a joke. But as I kept reading the article, it made me hate this country.
Fuck.
Clearly they were MI5/CIA goons who held hostage and burglarized a moslem family. Sure the "legal system" protects them.
It why in my state in AMERICA, I can kill the bastard as long as he's in my house. If I just happen to kill him outside, just drag them back inside the house, problem sovled.
But still, what is UK thinking? This Man is a hero. Besides, three bad guys VS one man who has the will and want to protect his family. I hope he gets out and the burglar gets in.
yeah. what right does a person have to threaten another person, absolutely none. Atleast charge them for trespassing stupid English and their corrupt bastards.
THIS IS WHY I WILL NOT VISIT YOUR COUNTRY UK.
Also why you are America's doormat.
usxUk DUH! I love hetalia....
However if this was in america, the results might be the same depending on where you live. Personally the us has just as many fucked up laws as the uk does. Apparently in other country's too, no surprise really...
For all of you guys that think that the punishment was unfair.
How would you react if the family members were off duty police officers?
My point is that, we believe that force should be used for defense and restraint, and punishment should be given and executed by the court.
We don't have whippings, lashings, and any other corporal punishment, because we see them unfit in our civilized nation. If the government sees itself unfit to give such punishment, we are too.
even if he killed him and convited, the robber will still be charge with trespass and stealing right? did those crime just disappear?
“The attack which then occurred was totally unnecessary and amounted to a very violent revenge attack on a defenceless man."
Which he initiated in the first place. Now, I don't think we have all the details here, but someone who has tied me up in my own house and threatened me is defenseless just because he's gonna run for it? And then what happens if he comes back? I don't get this. 'Uh-oh! I fucked up bigtime! I broke into someone's house and tied them up and threatened to potentially kill and/or rape them if they don't do what I...wait, is that the son? WAIT! WAIT! Five minute break! I get a head start to run for it! You can't hurt me! Ouch! CRIMINA-OUCH! CRIMINALS! SOMEONE HELP!'
You can argue that the caliber of the beating they gave the guy was unwarranted and certainly it isn't something that someone should try to get away with just because the circumstances provided, but face it, the crooks were the initiators here and they showed killing intent. 'But he was defenseless on the ground'... Well how defenseless was he exactly? And how long does it take someone who is injured on the ground to lash out with a weapon? As this was not a gun but a knife-wielding crook, I can somewhat see where the judge was coming from, but I still don't think it sounds like the malice from the family was genuine as much as it was a delayed (and provoked) defense. Nor do I believe prison time will help 'wisen up' the would be vigilantes.
But jeez, this makes me happy to live in a place where the burglar is assumed at fault enough for me to safely defend myself without the risk of 'overdoing it.' ("Get out of my house" should be an ultimatum I can deliver, not something I have to wait for the cops to come do...lol)
@Anon of 4:08
"Well how defenseless was he exactly? And how long does it take someone who is injured on the ground to lash out with a weapon?"
Exactly.
"the burglar is assumed at fault enough for me to safely defend myself without the risk of 'overdoing it.' ("Get out of my house" should be an ultimatum I can deliver, not something I have to wait for the cops to come do)"
That and the above being the things some of the people in this thread vilifying violent self-defense don't understand. Yes, it was excessive, and shouldn't be overlooked. But the punishment in their case does not match the crime.
In some states including mine there is a law (with different names) called the make my day law. If a person forces their way into your home and there are signs of forced entry, you have the right to blow as many holes in them as you deem necessary. Afterwards you are completely protected from lawsuit and criminal action
What state do you live in? Perhaps I should move there.
The legal term is "violent and tumultuous entry." I love that term. It amuses me.
Unless you corrupt the state attourney or judge.
Of course, he should have let the man get away so that the criminal justice system can do its job and never find him.
I think its my obligation now to find a way how to kill all people and kill em all..
whoever disagrees is a selfish bastard who doesnt think for others...
*cough* yes by killing evry1 I think I'll save them from a lifetime of bullshit
The burgulars threatened to kill them... what a bad loophole in the justice system. The rich guy should fire his lawyer and hire a better one.
I believe the family should suffer some consequence for such a severe response, but for them to receive a harsher punishment than the original perpetrator that incited the response is unfair. The burglar deserves prison time and the harshest punishment available for being a repeat offender of the law. The family deserves a light punishment or counseling to prevent such violent responses to spread to their daily lives. It would endanger society if a "victim" was allowed to seek revenge anyway they wanted, which is why there are laws restricting the actions of the victim. This was a very complicated case and such cases are wholly dependent on the caliber of the judge to make a fair and judicious ruling.
No...we ought to place Muslims under our thumbs. Bear in mind, is that the Muslims are bound to seek revenge on others whatever it takes (they'd followed the writtings on their books and NOT reading between the lines). For others, we still have the limitations and sound mind to stop our actions, thus, let our Government Laws to handle criminals, not beat them to pulp.
Some people here have played too much GTA and they thing that if you rob a house and you run enough you Crime Stars will just go down and you are not a criminal anymore!!
A criminal is a criminal in and out the house, if i see someone breaking into my car and taking my stereo i will run behing with whatever i can hit him with and taking it back, and hitting him hard enough so he can´t defend himself and has payment for damaging my car and thinks 2 times about touching it again.
Now, what would you do Mr"criminals have human rights"? Stay there and call the police? putting a retard face and saying goodbye to your stereo and getting bothered with police stuff so in the end the burglar keeps robbing. Ah, and next week you gonna get robbed again cause you didn´t put any resistance.
So...u r a Muslim. Muslim are barbarians if you read thru their 'books'. Muslims usually take laws in their own hands...so why does 911 occur? or Jihad terrorism??? B'COZ, they wanna rule the world and blame this problems solely on Bush. Obama is Ok...we'll see his performance.
I understand the idea not to let people make their own justice, but this happened clearly not out of revenge, but still in the heat of the moment, just with turned sides. I still would punish such behaviour, but not with prison or anything that severe, more like a warning. If that millionaire had sent a "group" after thouse guys to beat the shit out of em, that would be another matter of course.
If someone attacks you, you can defend yourself. What you can't do is chase him down, knock the guy down, and beat him with a cricket bat until he's dumber than Sarah Palin.
If they had stopped with just taking him to the ground and disabling his ability to fight until the police got there, they wouldn't have gotten arrested. However, when you try to kill a guy in revenge, with multiple people beating on him with weapons, it goes beyond self defense to attempted murder.
Cool.
Where do you live? Address? I'll be by for a visit. Have your shit packed up for my convenience, please.
I want in!
If we lose, or they start fighting back, we'll drop our weapons but not their stuff, apologize profusely, and proceed to run the hell away with their shit before the Cops arrive.
=)
in their 'home' country , the perps would be slowly cut into bitesize chunks by the family of the people they robbed...
let them kill each other , less for us to deal with...
and in england the law is a complete and total ass...
first they got their guns then they took their freedom of speech , now the courts rule by fiat...
f**k england , they could have solved these problems 60 years ago...
It be "Revenge" if they didn't call the cops, tracked down where the bad guys lived and went to his house and beat the crap out him then.
The kidnapper burglars had at least one knife, they had threatened to kill the family. A knife is a lethal weapon, you can use lethal force against someone threatening you with a knife. The burglars ran, and legally they could stop them with force, now did they do all that damage in a few hits? or we're they wailing on him for hours till the cops showed up?
The damage done really doesn't say much a muscular guy swinging a metal pole can crush a skull in as little as one hit.
The age of the criminal doesn't matter at all, its not like those people knew he was 56, and its not like a 56 year old is incapable of killing someone with a knife.
If they we're excessive then yeah give them a slap on the wrist, but its criminally insane, to punish people acting in the heat of the moment more then a "terrorist" who the legal system has let off time and time again.
if the rule of law meant a damn, the rule of law shouldn't let a 50 time repeat criminal be on the streets, i think they should sue the government, for being kidnapped by someone the legal system did not hold accountable for crimes. Essentially they condoned his actions by letting him continue to rob people.
Times like these I'm glad I don't live in the UK or the USA.
“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 the criminal justice system take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.”
Except vigilante justice is pretty much the only fair system left since all you law abiding pencil pushers either don't punish the worst crimes good enough or punish completely retarded crimes too harsh (see one of the previous articles). Fuck you, and fuck your law.
..... wow there are allot of scary people on sankakucomplex, amateur crooks out there that are just doing it for the quick cash and aren't killers do not AND I SAY DO NOT rob these people here! They will murder you In cold blood!! You've been warned!
SWEET JUSTICE
The victim was a 53-year-old businessman, not an army commando. Old civilians are not trained to keep their cool in a life-threatening situation like a fucking marine. His life was in danger, as was his children's lives and his wife's.
So they're basically saying I can walk up to a random house, break in and blurgarized them. And if they resist I killed them. But should they resisted and they overpower me I can just put my hands up, say 'uncle' and then run away without having to worry about them chasing me down or anything?
That's great. I can probably hit about half a dozen houses by tomorrow. And should any of them beat me - well - I guess I'll run out the driveway and head for their neighbour's.
The UK stopped protecting their citizens the second they banned guns. What happened? Stabbings mysteriously started to escalate. I'm glad I live in Florida where we get the Castle Doctrine.
The Florida "Castle Doctrine" law basically does three things:
One: It establishes, in law, the presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters or intrudes into your home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm, therefore a person may use any manner of force, including deadly force, against that person.
Two: It removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be. You no longer have to turn your back on a criminal and try to run when attacked. Instead, you may stand your ground and fight back, meeting force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others. [This is an American right repeatedly recognized in Supreme Court gun cases.]
Three: It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force.
Edit: I can't wait for this subject to come up on "Have I Got News For You" they're probably gonna rip into it.
Same here in my state you can have concealed carry and it has a stand your ground law.
The UK looks like a criminal's paradise.
The citizens not only don't have guns and can't even defend themselves without worry of being charged with a crime.
The cops rarely carry guns and now are lazy choosing to watch via a CCTV system vs actually walking or driving the beat.
It seems if you want to be a criminal the UK is the place to do it.
At least in Japan if a school girl kicks a mugger's ass she's a hero.
In the UK they'd throw her in jail.
Think about this.
Have you guys ever seen a horror/slash flick? Do you remember when the meek little bookworm manage to, somehow, over power the assailent. Remember what she did? That's right, she kicks the down guy once and then ran away.
I'm sure you reacted the same way I did - "WHY DIDN'T YOU BEAT HIM UP YOU SILLY GIRL - HE'S GOING TO GET BACK UP, GRAB THE KNIFE AND THEN FUCKING CHASE YOU"
Of course, that's exactly what happened.
Now, the white night hero killed him and save her in the end. But not after another 20 minutes of agonising chase and possibly death of another character before he was stopped.
Well - now you know why she didn't beat him up; the 'justice' system will fuck her over afterwards that's why.
Moral of the story:
If you're going to take off after the guy who just busted into your home and held you at knifepoint, make sure you finish the job...
this is one seriously fucked up shit
in cases like this u have to appreciate law if u live in state like jp where u can cut fuckers head off with katana, or us, where u can annihilate him with anti-tank rifle, lol :)
to stop a peeping tom, just gauge their eyeballs.
to stop a cannibal, just destroy their teeth.
to stop a thief, just cut off their arm.
to stop a rapist, just cut off/mutilate their genitals.
justice is sweet. and thank Sankaku for more articles of genital mutilation.
the most fucked up sense of justice. THe judge must be drunk when the verdict is passed down
That is the most backasswards sense of justice I have ever seen.
The fucker was a career criminal and broke into the man's home tied up and threatened to kill his family.
If all he was doing was stealing he may have some rights but he threatened to kill them.
You relinquish your right to live when you commit crimes like that.
Sure the US may have it's problems but unlike the UK I can still put a bullet in the heads of scum like this if they give me a reason like that.
Or use a Katana on them but really I wouldn't want to get the burglar's blood all over me as I might catch something.
>Munir Hussain
>Millionaire
>Mosque
I see no problems here.
THIS IS SO UPSETTING TO ME WOW
The judge is the real criminal, and should be imprisoned.
firs of, HOLYSHIT this coment page is LONG, second there is no justice here and the judghe should be hanged by the balls for doing everything possibly wrong in this case.
Christ, you guys would probably shit your pants if put into the same situation. Be real, anybody would seek revenge when given a chance. Giving the two "victims" 30+ months in prison is excessive.
So the criminals had their family at knife point, and that's not considered enough provocation to beat him up?
Really, these sentences should have been switched around. I agree there is a line that should be drawn, even in a situation like this but, this criminal would never have gotten hurt if he were following the law.
It's the risk he chose to take when he decided to, with his gang, break into someone else's home.
I sincerely hope that the judge has his house broken into, and is then disbarred and thrown in jail for trying to stop someone from killing him or taking his possessions in his own home on his private property.
Seriously, this kind of bullshit has to be stopped. Sure, I care about other people just as much as the next guy, but I should have the right to prevent and deter a burglar from taking my hard earned possessions because he can't be arsed make his own money.
This is utter BULLSHIT! How are u gonna ensure if the burglar is restrained properly!? I'm not a cop so I dont have anything better than a handcuff. I can't even do a proper KNOT! Is it better to immobilize him and knock him out in case he counter attack us.
Just sit on him... you are also allowed to beat him up once or twice if he tries to move but if he's down and not moving, you are still not allowed to use a weapon against him...
Must be hard for those that still use velcro to keep their shoes on...
How about some tie wraps? even the police use them theirselves.
(aka as: zip tie, zap strap, zip strip, wire tie, mouse belt, cable tie, quick draw, or rat belt .. so many names for the same thing :\)
Completely unnecessary for them to beat the guy.
JUDGEMENT! desu-no!
damn, we need anti-skill
another stupidity
that judges just do announce to all criminals (or criminal wannabe)
" Bribe all house if you want it, don't worry. You won't get hurt, probably jailed (if you get caught) but don't worry about damage. You WON'T DIE, and if you DO. We'll take care of it PERIOD " ...
CCTV is awesome
British cop: Hey look a mugging...and the perp has a pistol
British cop 2: let's go and help that man
British cop 1: No way...he has a gun and we have flashlights....let's just watch him shoot that wanker.
British cop 2: shoot, the wanker kill him.
British cop 1: ah well, let's arrest him, he won't shot us. We'll get promoted this month.
British cop 2: " You're under arrest for killing burglar, you shot him, before he shot you. That's a crime "
I suggest that all burglars burglarize that judge. Let's see how he likes to let his burglar free after cleaning him out.
probably the "millionare" family was MOSLEM (they returned from the mosque and surprised the burglars)
yeah, brits and aussies..fucking racist countries with cunts in office
im an asian with friends and families in the uk and aussie (no you DO NOT DESERVE CAPITALIZATION) and they have no other stories to tell other than how the locals,, especially the caucasians, treat them.
soon, you caucasians, will be the minorities.
the day is coming.
Reward the criminal, punish the victim. This illustrates leftist ideology.
"Reward the criminal, punish the victim. This illustrates leftist ideology."
This illustrates your stupidity.
WHAT RETARDED CRAP!?
Here in Texas, you can pretty much SHOOT & KILL BURGLARS who are in your home, especially when they have weapons at your family.
Stupid.
All it was, they were trying to stop the guy from leaving - so that justice can be brought on those 3 guys. Think they burglar went down without a fight?
Everyone is criticizing this ruling but it makes a lot of sense it you think about it. The criminals tied people up, it doesn't sound like they physically injured anyone. When they roles reversed and these two men caught the one 56 year old criminal they should have tied him up and called the cops. But instead the beat the shit out of him enough to give him a fractured skull. That's not self defense, the old man was trying to flee. Those people should definitely face a punishment for that. As for the criminal not getting a sentence, maybe the judge thought brain-damage was bad enough?
"His injuries may qualify him for a disability benefit."
WTF, justice fail.
The burglar shouldn't have gotten off... but read closely. Jailing the victims is far from insane here. They brutally beat a nearly 60-year-old man who, by this point was both no longer a threat and completely defenseless, doing grievous injury to him. Just because they robbed you doesn't make being an old man nearly to death right. Both parties should have been jailed -- it's disgraceful to jail the victim of the original crime and let the perpetrator go free, but it would have been just as disgraceful to jail the original perpetrator and not force the victim to pay for their brutality. They should both be jailed for this, and it's a miscarriage of justice that either of them got off.
I'd say, a victim who executes an identical type of punishment to that of the perpetrator is no different than the perpetrator him-/herself, but executing equal judgement in the right manner is the best thing to do. Being slapped doesn't always mean you have the right to slap back, but in situations when lives are in danger, self-defense is fine.
But then again, it's all just utopian thinking...
Court punishment unto the victims is debatable, but letting off the criminals scot-free in addition to medical benefits entitlement caused by their own act that started all this is just wrong.
Hence, LAW FAIL.
alert('test');
the judge is an ARSEHOLE...
STUPID FUCKING U.K LAWS
Canadian law has the same provision, and it is a source of constant irritation to most people that the criminals get off lighter than those trying to defend their lives, property, or businesses.