[The Polymath]

If a man named Tom went up to a stranger in the street, broke his nose, twisted and broke his arm and fingers, shot both his kneecaps, and then smashed his teeth out as he cried for help, then clubbed his head in until he screamed for him to stop, before smashing his back with a brick, causing permanent spinal injuries, brain damage, and resulting in amputation of his arm, whilst being caught on 3 CCTV cameras along with two witnesses who happened to be off-duty police officers, I would happily defend him in court and would not expect him to be imprisoned according to British law.

Now, who can explain my belief first?

No, I'm not some sadistic dude who believes in the spontaneous attacking of innocents, either

[M4LLY]

Interestingly my name is Tom, and i've never dreamt doing any of that to anyone, therefore you would have no need to defend me in court

[FDR]

(Original post by Junaid96)
If a man named Tom went up to a stranger in the street, broke his nose, twisted and broke his arm and fingers, shot both his kneecaps, and then smashed his teeth out as he cried for help, then clubbed his head in until he screamed for him to stop, before smashing his back with a brick, causing permanent spinal injuries, brain damage, and resulting in amputation of his arm, whilst being caught on 3 CCTV cameras along with two witnesses who happened to be off-duty police officers, I would happily defend him in court and would not expect him to be imprisoned according to British law.

Now, who can explain my belief first?

No, I'm not some sadistic dude who believes in the spontaneous attacking of innocents, either

Because you would use the Chewbacca defence?

[Hopple]

(Original post by Junaid96)
If a man named Tom went up to a stranger in the street, broke his nose, twisted and broke his arm and fingers, shot both his kneecaps, and then smashed his teeth out as he cried for help, then clubbed his head in until he screamed for him to stop, before smashing his back with a brick, causing permanent spinal injuries, brain damage, and resulting in amputation of his arm, whilst being caught on 3 CCTV cameras along with two witnesses who happened to be off-duty police officers, I would happily defend him in court and would not expect him to be imprisoned according to British law.

Now, who can explain my belief first?

No, I'm not some sadistic dude who believes in the spontaneous attacking of innocents, either

The stranger had just done the same thing to all of Tom's family (and his pet puppy and kitten just to get the animal lovers even more on his side) and Tom just went nuts.

[Pitt1988]

Mitigating circumstances? Or maybe under duress?

[I Gurn Hard]

Another fun little thing for you people:

Try farting in a lift. It can cause acute social awkwardness, but if you appear better groomed than someone else in the lift, you can easily shift the blame by glancing at your non-fartee lift colleagues and making a disapproving expression, motioning tactlessly towards the unfortunate victim of your sneaky buffoonery.

[Hopple]

Another theory, Tom has diplomatic immunity, maybe he's King Tom.

[jimmyrussles]

Was the stranger a phaggot?

[jimmyrussles]

Wait, is Tom doing all of that stuff to himself?

[schenker]

(Original post by jimmyrussles)
Wait, is Tom doing all of that stuff to himself?

^ This.

[Hopple]

(Original post by jimmyrussles)
Wait, is Tom doing all of that stuff to himself?

I guess the usage of pronouns makes it ambiguous enough. Though you've still got him carrying a gun and shooting it It also needs the magnitude of self harm there to be physically possible, clubbing your own head in whilst staying conscious to then smash his back in with the brick, which I'm not sure you can actually get enough force for.

[CurtisDean]

" If a man named Tom" - Tom could be anyone, the man that named him is who we are focusing on; but then again, I am still not sure about what the possible answer/s could be

[YahRah]

The only way that he would avoid imprisonment would be through a defence, and a bloody good one at that, or if you could prove that he had no intention and therefore no mens rea.

However there is a big difference between not being imprisoned and not being convicted.

[Darth Stewie]

The only place tom should be imprisoned is a mental institution after doing all that to himself in front of a stranger.

The stranger even screamed for him to stop, Tom is a nutter.

So my guess is you would be betting that Tom would be found not guilty by reason of insanity to any crimes he may have initially been charged with (gun possession, disturbing the peace ect) and would later be sent for psychiatric treatment.

[Fishbulb25]

You are tom? so you'd happily defend yourself?

[Fynch101]

Hi everyone, my name is Junaid and I just read something in a book and because my parents don't give me enough attention I need you guys to make me feel like my life has purpose by sounding impressed because I can read and process information like a regular human being.

[Steevee]

This 'man' is actually a Honey Badger?

[Formerly Helpful_C]

(Original post by Junaid96)
If a man named Tom went up to a stranger in the street, broke his nose, twisted and broke his arm and fingers, shot both his kneecaps, and then smashed his teeth out as he cried for help, then clubbed his head in until he screamed for him to stop, before smashing his back with a brick, causing permanent spinal injuries, brain damage, and resulting in amputation of his arm, whilst being caught on 3 CCTV cameras along with two witnesses who happened to be off-duty police officers, I would happily defend him in court and would not expect him to be imprisoned according to British law.

Now, who can explain my belief first?

No, I'm not some sadistic dude who believes in the spontaneous attacking of innocents, either

I know that you're capable of using full stops because you have one in that passage. So, I'll ask the question everyone wants an answer to - why have you only used one full stop?

[R92]

If you are defending him in court, you are likely to be a trained barrister. Therefore your belief should be that he is innocent until proven guilty (under UK law). The determination of whether he is guilty or not lies with the judge, not yourself, no matter what evidence you have seen in relation to the case.

Am right?

[CJKay]

Insanity?