UPDATE: Victim Jailed for Resisting Burglar, Burglar Set Free

[chronobreak]

Well, if they didn't detain him, the police never would have caught him. On the other hand, it doesn't do much good to beat the crap out of the guy, if he is a career criminal it's not like this one experience is going to set his life straight. Pounding on him was purely out of spite and revenge, especially if he was trying to get away, and in the eyes of the law it really doesn't matter if he deserved it or not.

As far as the discrepancies of sentencing, stealing a television from a guys house is a lot less serious than beating someone and possibly killing them, no matter the circumstance. Of course assault is going to carry a higher charge than petty theft.

 

[Jark212]

Personally I don't think prison time is appropriate. Charge them the full cost of his medical bills maybe. I do agree that they should not have beaten him so severely. However if you look at the root cause of this, none of it would have happened if the guy hadn't broken into their house, so basically it's his own fault he got injured.

When a burger robs a bank they take into account that they could get shot. They robed that knowing full-well that they could get killed, kind of like playing Russian roulette...

 

[Motiv_]

To be honest I'd probably be more surprised if you told me rain was wet. The justice system, quite frankly, fails. While I must admit that Brain Damage is a bit heavy handed of supposed "Self Defense", I doubt that a 3 year prison sentence is exactly fair.

Edit: In fact, looking back at it, I'm honestly starting to wonder whether it was just self defense or not. Beating someone so hard that they suffer brain damage means hard enough to kill. They could very well have killed him.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Opinions? Thoughts?

It's probably worth stressing that he isn't being jailed for resisting the burglary. He's being jailed for, once having chased away said burglars, not calling the Police but cornering one of them and beating him so hard he's been left with brain damage (hence why no prosecution for said burglar, he's not going anywhere anyway).

I don't think the guy should have been sent down, but the Judge rightly pointed out that there is a point where you are no longer protecting your property and family. But blindly taking revenge and ignoring the law.

I'd like to think I'd behave better in such a situation, but past experience says I'd probably do exactly what he did. That doesn't make it any better though, it's still gbh and it's still left a guy (admittedly the bad guy, but he's somebody's kid) brain damaged.

I suppose the moral is you kill the guy and claim it was a horrific prolonged struggle, he ain't gonna argue otherwise... or focus on keeping your loved ones safe and not chasing armed bastards down the garden.

tl:dr, I think the guy was wrong to beat the living shit out the burglar to the extent he did and after he'd succesfully freed his family, but I also think the Judge has been over zealous and shouldn't have sent him to prison.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Oh, poor burglar. I mean, all the nice man tried to do was threaten the family members at gunpoint that they will die if they move and steal shit from their house. However, those terrible persons that owned the house managed to break free and beat the living shit out of the burglar. They are dangerous people and should be put in jail for LIFE! OF COURSE he deserved to be set free, I mean he's such a nice person...


SERIOUSLY?! What where you THINKING judge?! The man threatens the owner at gunpoint that he's going to kill his entire family if he doesn't cooperate and you set him free? You fucking moron.

That judge should be fired and castrated.

 

[elemenetal150]

he should have beat the dude, dragged him in to his house, killed him, then stabbed him self in the hand, the lower arm, and the upper arm then told the police that he killed the dude defending himself and was afraid for his life

 

[Lexodus]

Thanks England, for setting the bar high in the 'who is most divorced from reality' legal system!

Oh, don't worry, dear Furburt; we're very, very low on the weird-shit-o-meter in comparison to other countries. Yes, this is ridiculous, but some of the stuff that goes on...

 

[Supreme Unleaded]

I was waiting for it so say that it happend in the UK, it just had UK written all over it.

Good thing i live in America, if I did that and the jury found me guilty for beating the guy up I'd have 20,000 rednecks hold a rally for me.

But seriosly, they threatend to kill the guys with a knife, and they hurt the guy, that acceptable. Seriosly, if the burglers just walked i nand said gimme all your money with no weapon, restraints, and threats (the guy who stole the MW2 copies at gamestop because he said his friend had a sniper trained on the guy (cashere) comes to mind here) then i could see how the beating was a bit much. But if some guy walked into my house and did that I'd also beat his face in given the chance.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Oh, poor burglar. I mean, all the nice man tried to do was threaten the family members at gunpoint that they will die if they move and steal shit from their house. However, those terrible persons that owned the house managed to break free and beat the living shit out of the burglar. They are dangerous people and should be put in jail for LIFE! OF COURSE he deserved to be set free, I mean he's such a nice person...


SERIOUSLY?! What where you THINKING judge?! The man threatens the owner at gunpoint that he's going to kill his entire family if he doesn't cooperate and you set him free? You fucking moron.

That judge should be fired and castrated.

What was the judge thinking? He was probably thinking that pointless revenge no longer has a place in our society.

 

[knight of zendikar]

Wow if a man threatens to kill my family over money at knife point hes gettin a hollow point in the head regardless of if he was fleeing. yes it may be a little extreme but anyone who even thinks about laying a hand on my family is a dead man.

 

[Superbeast]

If they'd beaten the man up whilst he was still threatening them they probably wouldn't have been prosecuted. It's because they were running away when beaten - it amounts to assault instead of self-defence (because they were no longer under threat).

It's like taking a hunting rifle with a decent scope and taking a guy who mugged you out from a block away after the fact. It may make you feel better, and many wouldn't see a huge amount wrong with it, but it's no longer self-defence.

Probably would have helped if the uncle/son called the police instead of a spot of vigilantism. Or if the lad had gone to a neighbour for help instead of a "nearby uncle" (the uncle may well have been a neighbour, but the wording makes me think differently).

Am very surprised the breaking-and-enterer got away without prison time though, but I guess a non-custodial sentence is still a punishment. Oh wait, I'm talking about my country, forget that...

+EDIT+

Holy crap ninjas! There were 7 posts when I was typing this.

Ah the rise of internet toughguy-ism. I was wondering how long that would take.

As for "I'd kill them" or "I'd shoot them with hollow points!" or "Kill him, cut yourself*" - this is the UK where such behaviour is frowned upon. I know some states have a "Castle Doctrine" or similar to that effect, but there is nothing in the UK.

You can use "reasonable force" - if your life is under threat then you can (technically, it'll be a ***** to prove though) kill. But once the other fella is running away, and you GBH/kill them then it's no longer self-defence.

And to be honest, if you're willing to kill some bloke who stole a TV (threatening your family or not) who legs it when they realise they're outgunned/outnumbered then you are scum yourself. The fact the fella flees is indicative that they are unwilling to have physically harmed your family, and ergo you are gunning them down in cold blood. If they were in the process of actually harming a family member then go right ahead - I wouldn't have a complaint with that.

*This wouldn't work - an autopsy would be mandatory and the evidence wouldn't stack up - the victim/burglar wouldn't have any defensive wounds, nor abrasion marks on the fists, nor would there be the correct disposition of epithelials for an assault. And your defensive wounds would look self-inflicted.

 

[chromewarriorXIII]

While I do see the point of this and I do think that the people who beat the burglar should face consequences I also think that the burglar should as well. This reminds me of a guy that broke into someones house, tripped and fell through a glass table and then sued the homeowners. And of course he won because people these days are stupid.

 

[Panzer_God]

Thanks England, for setting the bar high in the 'who is most divorced from reality' legal system!

what are you going on about. America is far worse. We're the only counrty in the world where you can be sued for saving someones life.

 

[Bretty]

So the man was fleeing, they caught him, and they kicked the living shit out of him? That my friends is against the law. Whether we think he had it coming or not. it is against the law as it should be.

Should the burglar get prison time, yes. The Uncle and Son? Yes! Of course!

This is by definition Vigilantism (lol sp).

I am glad the guy got his ass handed to him, wish they all had. But that doesnt mean I believe that they should get no time for this. Revenge comes at a cost, always does, and this is theirs.

I think the Justice System got this one right.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

What was the judge thinking? He was probably thinking that pointless revenge no longer has a place in our society.

Yeah, he had no reason to take revenge on the man, apart from the fact that he threatened to kill his entire family and then proceeded to loot his house.

 

[Doug]

Via the Daily Mail."

....

Opinions? Thoughts?

Its the Daily Mail.

Hence, they've probably left out one or two key details that actually completely undermine the story. Probably. They are one of these newspapers that run stories about 'The Tide of Immigration is Destroying Britain' and 'Immigratants are taking British jobs from British workers!'

The Daily Mail isn't really a credited newspaper, it's like the Onion in the states... Anyway, that's how our justice system works. It sucks and needs to be changed.

Ha, at least The Onion News Network reports on the important stories! Like the giant Dragon tank Obama is having axed, or the US's criminal deployment of Hilary Clinton on innocent Pakistan civilians.

 

[Superbeast]

What was the judge thinking? He was probably thinking that pointless revenge no longer has a place in our society.

Yeah, he had no reason to take revenge on the man, apart from the fact that he threatened to kill his entire family and then proceeded to loot his house.

The man may have had reason for wanting revenge, but that doesn't mean it's legal or should become accepted in society. Subtle difference that the other poster was getting at.