Businessman on trial for assaulting two thieves on his property...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2544030/Businessman-attacks-two-burglars-catching-red-handed-arrested-defending-property.html
Bizarre. Just bizarre. The law in this country is so skewered.
Bizarre. Just bizarre. The law in this country is so skewered.
Scroll to see replies
Ignoring this charge, how the hell do they get off with a pittance of a fine when they were clearly caught in the act?! They're not even denying they were there to steal from his business.
If I were the businessman I'd say I feared for my life, after all he says the guy with the fence post was on top of him hitting him, then he got the upper hand and hit the guy a load of times with it. Tbh you would, you're going to want to completely batter the guy until he's not mobile.
They went onto his property and were caught red handed stealing from him, no one is dead, he clearly didn't torture them or anything, as the police arrived in fairly short time, it's ridiculous you can't stand up for yourself.
If I were the businessman I'd say I feared for my life, after all he says the guy with the fence post was on top of him hitting him, then he got the upper hand and hit the guy a load of times with it. Tbh you would, you're going to want to completely batter the guy until he's not mobile.
They went onto his property and were caught red handed stealing from him, no one is dead, he clearly didn't torture them or anything, as the police arrived in fairly short time, it's ridiculous you can't stand up for yourself.
He was found not guilty
https://www.facebook.com/SupportAndrewWoodhouse
https://www.facebook.com/SupportAndrewWoodhouse
Original post by tonberry
Good news.
Good he wasn't found guilty. He didn't do anything wrong! And neither of them died, so what the **** was the problem.
Not shocking at all.
You may use reasonable force to defend yourself and property. This guy left one of the intruders with a broken arm and two broken legs.
It was only right that with the injuries sustained by the intruders and the allegations made by them, that the matter was investigated and left to a jury to decide.
You may use reasonable force to defend yourself and property. This guy left one of the intruders with a broken arm and two broken legs.
It was only right that with the injuries sustained by the intruders and the allegations made by them, that the matter was investigated and left to a jury to decide.
Original post by InnerTemple
Not shocking at all.
You may use reasonable force to defend yourself and property. This guy left one of the intruders with a broken arm and two broken legs.
It was only right that with the injuries sustained by the intruders and the allegations made by them, that the matter was investigated and left to a jury to decide.
You may use reasonable force to defend yourself and property. This guy left one of the intruders with a broken arm and two broken legs.
It was only right that with the injuries sustained by the intruders and the allegations made by them, that the matter was investigated and left to a jury to decide.
That's less than reasonable force IMO.
Original post by MJ1012
That's less than reasonable force IMO.
I agree. I think that is what makes this guy's arrest and trial fair. You have the intruders complaining of excessive force... one of which is laying on the ground with all but one limb broken.
Kinda gives a little weight to what they are saying.
God knows what evidence the jury used to decide this was reasonable.
Original post by InnerTemple
I agree. I think that is what makes this guy's arrest and trial fair. You have the intruders complaining of excessive force... one of which is laying on the ground with all but one limb broken.
Kinda gives a little weight to what they are saying.
God knows what evidence the jury used to decide this was reasonable.
Kinda gives a little weight to what they are saying.
God knows what evidence the jury used to decide this was reasonable.
Well no, all that tells you is that FORCE was used.
Original post by InnerTemple
I agree. I think that is what makes this guy's arrest and trial fair. You have the intruders complaining of excessive force... one of which is laying on the ground with all but one limb broken.
Kinda gives a little weight to what they are saying.
God knows what evidence the jury used to decide this was reasonable.
Kinda gives a little weight to what they are saying.
God knows what evidence the jury used to decide this was reasonable.
It appears we actually disagree.
Personally I think have some pride not to press charges when you break into someones property, grab a weapon, 2 on 1 and then get your arse kicked.
Original post by MJ1012
It appears we actually disagree.
Personally I think have some pride not to press charges when you break into someones property, grab a weapon, 2 on 1 and then get your arse kicked.
Personally I think have some pride not to press charges when you break into someones property, grab a weapon, 2 on 1 and then get your arse kicked.
Sorry - I mis read your post.
There are usually two camps in this sort of discussion. Those who agree with the whole reasonable force idea and those who feel that as soon as someone comitts a crime, that person becomes fair game for a good beating.
The intruders would not have pressed charges - the CPS would have done that.
Original post by limetang
Well no, all that tells you is that FORCE was used.
A lot of force, I'd say. Verging on unreasonable.
The injuries sustained corroborate what the victims are saying.
Original post by InnerTemple
Sorry - I mis read your post.
There are usually two camps in this sort of discussion. Those who agree with the whole reasonable force idea and those who feel that as soon as someone comitts a crime, that person becomes fair game for a good beating.
The intruders would not have pressed charges - the CPS would have done that.
A lot of force, I'd say. Verging on unreasonable.
The injuries sustained corroborate what the victims are saying.
There are usually two camps in this sort of discussion. Those who agree with the whole reasonable force idea and those who feel that as soon as someone comitts a crime, that person becomes fair game for a good beating.
The intruders would not have pressed charges - the CPS would have done that.
A lot of force, I'd say. Verging on unreasonable.
The injuries sustained corroborate what the victims are saying.
I'm admittedly in the latter camp to be honest. To break into someones property with the extent to steal is completely disrespectful, to then expect to be treated with respect to avoid a beating when you tried to cause that person physical and financial harm is ridiculous IMO
I assume they could drop the charges if they wanted to, although you can hardly expect them to have any self respect considering they are petty thieves.
Original post by MJ1012
I'm admittedly in the latter camp to be honest. To break into someones property with the extent to steal is completely disrespectful, to then expect to be treated with respect to avoid a beating when you tried to cause that person physical and financial harm is ridiculous IMO
I assume they could drop the charges if they wanted to, although you can hardly expect them to have any self respect considering they are petty thieves.
I assume they could drop the charges if they wanted to, although you can hardly expect them to have any self respect considering they are petty thieves.
Well, we will agree to disagree on the first point. I just don't like the idea that should someone break into your house, laws just stop applying and you are given free reign to do whatever you please to them.
No one is saying they should be treated with 'respect'. Protect yourself, restrain them, arrest them. That is fine. But to break both legs and an arm?! That seems extreme and is worthy of inquiry.
On your second point - prosecutions are on behalf of the Crown. The State decides who gets prosecuted. Even where a victim wishes to withdraw, the prosecution can go ahead... though it becomes complicated.
Original post by InnerTemple
Sorry - I mis read your post.
A lot of force, I'd say. Verging on unreasonable.
The injuries sustained corroborate what the victims are saying.
A lot of force, I'd say. Verging on unreasonable.
The injuries sustained corroborate what the victims are saying.
When someone breaks into your business you should not have to be afraid of either retaliating and risk getting arrested, or not retaliating and risk having the life beat out of you.
Just shows what the 'justice' system really is in this country.
Original post by InnerTemple
Well, we will agree to disagree on the first point. I just don't like the idea that should someone break into your house, laws just stop applying and you are given free reign to do whatever you please to them.
No one is saying they should be treated with 'respect'. Protect yourself, restrain them, arrest them. That is fine. But to break both legs and an arm?! That seems extreme and is worthy of inquiry.
On your second point - prosecutions are on behalf of the Crown. The State decides who gets prosecuted. Even where a victim wishes to withdraw, the prosecution can go ahead... though it becomes complicated.
No one is saying they should be treated with 'respect'. Protect yourself, restrain them, arrest them. That is fine. But to break both legs and an arm?! That seems extreme and is worthy of inquiry.
On your second point - prosecutions are on behalf of the Crown. The State decides who gets prosecuted. Even where a victim wishes to withdraw, the prosecution can go ahead... though it becomes complicated.
Just out of interest, if you came home to see a thug beating up your mum and you knew you had the ability to beat them up or just hold them there until the police arrived which one would you pick?
(This isn't intended to sound bitchy, just the tone it comes across on the internet)
While it does sound like excessive force in breaking both the thief's legs has been used, I certainly don't think its reasonable to prosecute someone for what clearly would have been a heat of the moment situation, and the fact that he had lost between £15k and £25k of machinery before, to me shows that perhaps he wasn't completely unjustified to be that frustrated, having already been affected by theft. The fines for the thieves seem outrageously lenient to me though, considering they're the criminals here, not the businessman.
In my opinion, the two thieving bastards deserved everything they got, or perhaps not enough. Bloody scum.
And the punishment: a 75 pound fine. 75 pounds?! That's probably only a night's pickings for them.
And the punishment: a 75 pound fine. 75 pounds?! That's probably only a night's pickings for them.
Original post by goldenfish
When someone breaks into your business you should not have to be afraid of either retaliating and risk getting arrested, or not retaliating and risk having the life beat out of you.
Just shows what the 'justice' system really is in this country.
Just shows what the 'justice' system really is in this country.
Does it?
The guy was acquitted and the intruders convicted. What part of this eventual outcome do you not agree with.
As I said above, allegations were made which were backed up by the severe injuries sustained by the intruders. It was only right that this was investigated and put before a jury.
The law does not put people in the conundrum you described in your first paragraph.
Original post by MJ1012
Just out of interest, if you came home to see a thug beating up your mum and you knew you had the ability to beat them up or just hold them there until the police arrived which one would you pick?
(This isn't intended to sound bitchy, just the tone it comes across on the internet)
(This isn't intended to sound bitchy, just the tone it comes across on the internet)
I don't really like to answer hypotheticals since one never knows how they would react. All I would say is that should I defend my mum, and then beat the crap out of them, I would fully expect that my actions would be investigated and I would be held to account for them. I'm fine with that.
It does look like this guy went a bit beyond just defending himself and his property. I don't think it is outrageous that he had to justify his use of, seemingly excessive, force.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Harvey Weinstein’s New York convictions quashed by state’s apex court
- Our country's justice system is an ABSOLUTE joke!
- Participants needed!!
- Does your bike rust when u leave it outside?
- Master's Dissertation Participants
- OCR A-level Law Paper 1 (H418/01) - 26th May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Participants needed
- Shoplifting
- Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
- Students accused of rape at university bringing lawyers to hearings
- Why are rents so high
- Vicarious liability
- Mr birling essay PLEASE MARK
- Feedback on the HAT (History Admissions Test) for this year
- Does this count as sexual harassment?
- Last minute accomodation available in Glasgow?
- Council tax exemption- multiple addresses
- 44 thieves study
- Hello
- Am I a lesbian or just traumatised?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
