UPDATE: Victim Jailed for Resisting Burglar, Burglar Set Free

[Internet Kraken]

So this justifies him beating the man until he suffered brain damage? He couldn't just hold him down until the police arrived? That would have neutralized him as a threat. You can't honestly tell me that his actions were not excessive. He tried to kill this man. I can't believe that people think he should get off the hook just because the victim was also a criminal.

What if the man broke free? Its not that easy to restrain somebody you cant just hold the guy. I think they were excessive in the violence needed to take him down, but i dont think any violence in excess if the amount taken to put him down is criminal. They didnt try to kill him; you think that two men with bats couldnt finish the job before the police arrived if they wanted to? If they wanted to kill him he would have been killed, they clearly wanted him out of action which is reasonable. I dont believe the man who broke in and held women and children at knifepoint should go free while the men who were put in a position where they were forced to act are grossly overpunished. I concede that the violence was excessive but you should concede that the man wouldnt have been hurt if he wasnt trying to loot teh mans house while holding him and his family hostage? What if they had killed his wife or child? Would their reaction then be just?

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. You think revenge can be justified, but I clearly don't. Neither of us are going to change eachother's views on this issue,

 

[manic_depressive13]

Well he wont trespass again will he, a knife in the throat from a 50 year old will be just as effectove as a knife in the throat froma 20 year old. He held the mans kids and sick wife at knifepoint and looted the mans house, thats when he deserved GBH.

Perhaps, but considering he was old and had two men against him, it would have been quite easy for them to detain him until the authorities arrived, as opposed to beating him senseless and causing permanent damage. It's true he threatened them, but he had the opportunity to kill/ injure them and chose not to, even after one man disobeyed his orders and ran away for help, leading me to believe that he had never actually intended to use the knife.
Again, it is a matter of knowing where the line is, and despite your opinions the law is on my side, so eat that.

 

[MikeOfThunder]

So this justifies him beating the man until he suffered brain damage? He couldn't just hold him down until the police arrived? That would have neutralized him as a threat. You can't honestly tell me that his actions were not excessive. He tried to kill this man. I can't believe that people think he should get off the hook just because the victim was also a criminal.

Fully agree with you! I think that it would of been justified to an extent to hit the man possibly once or twice, but this was by far excessive and un called for. Especially with the damage to the head.

 

[cheeseraven]

I think its stupid.....if its real.

the link that sends me to a page where all the advertisements are henti porn gets me a bit suspicious.

 

[Rett Silvari]

I've got to stick on the side of beating the hell out of the criminals. I know I'm going to hear it for this, but I think its wrong to go all 'tree-hugger' on the burglers. People should have a right to defend themselves and their family and homes. The burgling scum deserves to be hospitalized, they're the criminals in this situation.
Hell, just because I'm already going to get it for that I'll say this:
I think they should let the dad and unle have a few good swings at the other two burglers. Breaking and entering, then holding a family at knife-point deserves a serious ass-kicking.

 

[cainx10a]

I wouldn't even call putting a bullet into that bastard skull 'excessive'. Anyone who threatens someone else family, and expect pity when they are at a disadvantage are the worst type of scum. For all you know, he would be at if the week after, and might actually harm someone else. Bet it the family was a white, christian and British family, there would be less uproar about getting beaten to a pulp.

 

[Srkkl]

Ehh, it wasn't self defense because the burgler was running away and if it was it would be defense with excessive force, the robbers deserve prison but so do they.

 

[wax88]

i think it's time to rob some shit from pple and then sue their asses off if i fail to rob them...

 

[BrownGaijin]

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 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.?

I wonder if the judge ever saw "A Time to Kill".

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.

Hmmm Well that makes more sense.

 

[RootbeerJello]

If the burglar just tried to grab some money and leave I might consider this almost reasonable, but considering threats of death and being held hostage, this may be the most bat-shit insane thing I've ever read.

 

[Jark212]

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 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.?

I wonder if the judge ever saw "A Time to Kill".

Not in the UK...

 

[benoitowns]

Who the hell was the jury for this? surely they must understand the circumstances of the situation. who wouldnt attack the person who threatened your family with death.

 

[McNinja]

Bah, it's just BULL SH*T

 

[Bat Vader]

pfft, if people don't take the law into their own hands, who will? The police are pretty much overwhelmed these days, because of stuff like this.
I think it's a load of crap :/ So basically I can't defend myself if someone breaks into my house and threatens to stab me?
Apparently (I have no proof of this, just a rumour I heard) If you use a knife or "offensive weapon" on a burglar, you can be put in jail. So I'm trying to get hold of a baseball bat or something, 'cause I'm mega paranoid.
If this stuff is true then I can't even use a bat! It ain't fair. T^T

No, they are not saying that. What they are saying is that you can't beat someone who tried to harm you more than necessary. Like if someone hit you and you break their back paralyzing them that is considered unnecessary force.

This robber was running away and the two family members chased him down and beat him without mercy pretty much. Everyone has a right to defend themselves but not to go overboard when doing it.

 

[voidfalcon]

Remember, they never hurt anybody they only threatened to. If the victims gained the upper hand they should have tried to hold the criminals or just let them escape. If they couldn't incapacitate the criminal they should have let him go, instead of beating him half to death. The burglar's sentence is probably too light but that doesn't mean the father and brother didn't deserve their sentences.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I really do think Britain's legal system should promote VICTIMS of crime not letting themselves die.

That said, getting a man on the floor and giving him brain damage whilst he's trying to run away?
Now, if they had done a citizen's arrest, I don't think they'd be in so much trouble.

 

[SomeUnregPunk]

We're the only counrty in the world where you can be sued for saving someones life.

Uhm.......how does that work?

I guy pulled a woman from a flaming car after she ran into him. The car fire was enough to have cooked her alive. Him saving her broke her legs and she won a lawsuit for 10 million.

Man Sues Hospital for Procedure That Saves His Life From Overdose : 90,000 lbs..UK ... roughly $146,000 dollars : US [http://lawvibe.com/man-sues-hospital-for-procedure-that-saves-his-life-from-overdose/]

Jeb Corliss sued the city when the cops stopped him from jumping off the Empire State Building in 2006: he's sued for $30 million, complaining that the stress of being handcuffed to the railing (after security officers pulled him down as he was climbing over the safety railing) has caused "emotional distress" and "adrenal fatigue." [http://overlawyered.com/2008/01/suit-you-kept-me-from-jumping-off-the-empire-state-building/]
and
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/would-be-jumper-sues-empire-state-building/

Mother sues Glade over her son's death even though there are already warnings on the label of the Glade air freshener bottle that warn not to inhale the contents or die. [http://www.wafb.com/global/story.asp?s=11616294]

people sue other people for stupid reasons and our judges are pretty retarded enough to side with the idiots.

 

[DracoSuave]

The guy left to get a buddy, instead of a cop. That's the problem. He didn't get up, fight them off. He left, grabbed his buddy, came back, and had time to call the cops the entire time, which he did not do.

'Justice' was far from his intent. Now, I -do- think his lawyer should have pushed for temporary insanity, and the sentance is a bit much... but he had other, safer ways (for his family) to deal with this problem and he chose not to take them.

 

[Shoukyaku]

The article never stated how the man got his head injury, from personal experience in sports med it would be pretty easy to get a fractured skull if your legs where taken out from under you while running. They may have only done superficial damage when they proceeded to beat the crap outta him, but the article is rather unclear. Either way the judge is going way overboard because these people where not pacifists, and did not want to be under continual threat by this type of criminal element. In this case the judge forgot how the law is supposed to work.

The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed.The judge should have just given the son and uncle a fine for foricble restraint, while the criminal should have to suffer the full consequences of his actions.