Man who killed armed robber in his Glasgow home is jailed

Watch
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#41
Report 2 weeks ago
#41
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Stabbing someone 17 times is not self defense. Stab them once or twice, but if they're down you don't keep stabbing them. All for self defense but that doesnt constitute it.
(Original post by Ferrograd)
Reasonable force. I don't think he is being punished for protecting his family. I understand adrenaline and whilst I don't think he should be imprisoned, you cannot stab someone 17 times and claim self defence.
A split-second to act: a lifetime to judge.
0
reply
Bio 7
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#42
Report 2 weeks ago
#42
(Original post by Allie4)
Ridiculous. Its self-defence in my eyes.
17 stab wounds is self defence? You have a few anger issues there then 17 is beyond overkill.
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#43
Report 2 weeks ago
#43
(Original post by Profesh)
A split-second to act: a lifetime to judge.
Which is why you have a trial and expert evidence decided on by your peers.
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#44
Report 2 weeks ago
#44
(Original post by 999tigger)
Are you a lawyer? Do you know what the law is on home invasion or muder? Do you understand it?
Canb see you would have a good chance of being jailed.
No no and no. I see it as if you think you're a clever **** and decide to break into someone's house then you deal with the consequences, whatever they may be. How about don't break into someone's home? Or is that such a hard thing not to do these days?
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#45
Report 2 weeks ago
#45
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
Jesus we get it, you would protect your family, you can stop trying to flaunt it now.

And our justice system isn't a joke, I would prefer is someone got 7 years for an armed home invasion than they get killed, chance of rehabilitation after all.

The problem with this individual situation is not that he killed the intruder. Its the fact that he went beyond just incompaciating them and went to rage and over kill. That's the issue.

And just because you break into someone house, doesn't mean they can do whatever they like to you. Could you rape them? After all, as you say they consented to the consequences of their actions.
No need to strop about it lol I'm not flaunting anything, I'm saying it as it is. Its a pretty normal thing to say too, that you would die trying to protect those you love, isn't it? so I don't know why you're in a twist about it. I'm not tough by any means but fear does strange things to people. Maybe you'd be happy to have your family attacked, I don't know, but having someone break into my house with a knife is definitely up there with one of the things that terrifies me the most. For that reason, I think I would not hesitate to take someone down if I had to, rather than live a lifetime of heartbreak over a murdered family member.

Breaking into someone's house isn't exactly right anyway is it? So law abiding is out the window right away on that one. Some might see it as all bets are off.
Some intruders do break into houses with the intention to rape and/or murder. In cases like that how can one say "Well, just because they broke in to rape/murder you doesn't mean you can then do what you like to them".

I still lean towards if you break into someone's house, you can't be surprised by what happens. I mean what do you expect to happen?
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#46
Report 2 weeks ago
#46
(Original post by Minxel)
No need to strop about it lol I'm not flaunting anything, I'm saying it as it is. Its a pretty normal thing to say too, that you would die trying to protect those you love, isn't it? so I don't know why you're in a twist about it. I'm not tough by any means but fear does strange things to people. Maybe you'd be happy to have your family attacked, I don't know, but having someone break into my house with a knife is definitely up there with one of the things that terrifies me the most. For that reason, I think I would not hesitate to take someone down if I had to, rather than live a lifetime of heartbreak over a murdered family member.

Breaking into someone's house isn't exactly right anyway is it? So law abiding is out the window right away on that one. Some might see it as all bets are off.
Some intruders do break into houses with the intention to rape and/or murder. In cases like that how can one say "Well, just because they broke in to rape/murder you doesn't mean you can then do what you like to them".

I still lean towards if you break into someone's house, you can't be surprised by what happens. I mean what do you expect to happen?
I don't understand what's so difficult to get, when you break into someone's house you don't go in there thinking its fair if you get stabbed 17 times.
There is such thing as appropriate force.
And I wasn't in a strop about anything just so bored of you trying to brag about how you would go to jail for your family. Like we get it bro.
0
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#47
Report 2 weeks ago
#47
(Original post by Minxel)
No no and no. I see it as if you think you're a clever **** and decide to break into someone's house then you deal with the consequences, whatever they may be. How about don't break into someone's home? Or is that such a hard thing not to do these days?
The two aren't directly linked IMO

If an intruder dies committing a break in, yep, that's TS for them, they chose to invade someones property and safety. They are intentionally putting the owner in a defence situation and have to accept their consequences.

But at no point does that give you a 'right' to kill them, it's a mitigating circumstance. If you kill an intruder you'll need to answer a variety of v hard questions along the lines of 'Was there no other possible way you could have defended yourself?' and stabbing someone 17 times, mostly in the back just isn't going to look good., esp when you already have a record as they 99% do.

I get the impression this was personal, and the trouble there is it gives the defender a clear motive for finishing the guy off. I stay local, i'll have a nose about and see how dirty the guy was.

Or to put it another way, if someone breaks onto my building site and kills themselves in an accident, TS, but i'll still get in a lot of crap for having an unsafe building site and making bad choices.
Last edited by StriderHort; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#48
Report 2 weeks ago
#48
(Original post by Minxel)
No no and no. I see it as if you think you're a clever **** and decide to break into someone's house then you deal with the consequences, whatever they may be. How about don't break into someone's home? Or is that such a hard thing not to do these days?
Nope ofc they shouldnt invade and they deserve to be jailed. The issue is does the fact they have invaded you entitle you to kill them if you so wish, even if they pose no threat at some stage. The law enables you to use reasonable force and the adviuce is rather than endanger yourself with confrontation then you should get you and your family out if possible.
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#49
Report 2 weeks ago
#49
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
I don't understand what's so difficult to get, when you break into someone's house you don't go in there thinking its fair if you get stabbed 17 times.
There is such thing as appropriate force.
And I wasn't in a strop about anything just so bored of you trying to brag about how you would go to jail for your family. Like we get it bro.
Yes I'm very sure any criminal would think it unfair to have harm come to them when they're trying to commit their crimes. God forbid.
Im not a bro anyway. I'm female and I certainly was not bragging at all. Just trying to get the point across since for some reason people don't seem to think having someone break into your house is a big deal, when in actual fact it is absolutely terrifying and you can't plan what to do or even think logically about anything, especially when you have no idea at all what their intentions are and you can barely manage to do anything other than pee yourself.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#50
Report 2 weeks ago
#50
(Original post by Minxel)
Yes I'm very sure any criminal would think it unfair to have harm come to them when they're trying to commit their crimes. God forbid.
Im not a bro anyway. I'm female and I certainly was not bragging at all. Just trying to get the point across since for some reason people don't seem to think having someone break into your house is a big deal, when in actual fact it is absolutely terrifying and you can't plan what to do or even think logically about anything, especially when you have no idea at all what their intentions are and you can barely manage to do anything other than pee yourself.
No you can't prepare for what would happen, you act in the moment. However, even in an unplanned act, you would not stab someone 17 times for self defence, that is what happens in a situation of rage.
Simple really.
0
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#51
Report 2 weeks ago
#51
(Original post by 999tigger)
Nope ofc they shouldnt invade and they deserve to be jailed. The issue is does the fact they have invaded you entitle you to kill them if you so wish, even if they pose no threat at some stage. The law enables you to use reasonable force and the adviuce is rather than endanger yourself with confrontation then you should get you and your family out if possible.
See this is why I like the crowbar.

If home defence push came to absolute shove, and you strike someone once in the head and kill them. You're v likely legally ok. You grabbed the 1st thing to hand and struck your invader once. There's no complications like 'why did you have this in your home?' or 'why did you keep stabbing them?'

IMO the ideal answer you want to give to police is "I hit them once with first thing to hand then ran away" "What happened next?" "I don't know, I ran away"
1
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#52
Report 2 weeks ago
#52
(Original post by 999tigger)
Nope ofc they shouldnt invade and they deserve to be jailed. The issue is does the fact they have invaded you entitle you to kill them if you so wish, even if they pose no threat at some stage. The law enables you to use reasonable force and the adviuce is rather than endanger yourself with confrontation then you should get you and your family out if possible.
As I stated just in my newest comment. Having someone break into your house, whatever their intention may be, (and let's face it you'd never ever know unless you could read their mind OR they had already done what they were going to do) is frightening to the point you can't think straight. Like in a fire where, in practice, all you have to do is walk calm to the exit, but in a real out of control fire, everything goes to sh1t. Getting yourself and your family out ASAP is obviously the best thing to do but in reality not everyone's home affords them that privilege. I only have 1 exit in and out of my apartment and the windows don't open enough to get out of, so I'd be pretty screwed. My only options would be to accept my fate or try and fight back until there was no longer a threat.
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#53
Report 2 weeks ago
#53
(Original post by StriderHort)
See this is why I like the crowbar.

If home defence push came to absolute shove, and you strike someone once in the head and kill them. You're v likely legally ok. You grabbed the 1st thing to hand and struck your invader once. There's no complications like 'why did you have this in your home?' or 'why did you keep stabbing them?'

IMO the ideal answer you want to give to police is "I hit them once with first thing to hand then ran away" "What happened next?" "I don't know, I ran away"
This I do agree with tbh
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#54
Report 2 weeks ago
#54
(Original post by StriderHort)
See this is why I like the crowbar.

If home defence push came to absolute shove, and you strike someone once in the head and kill them. You're v likely legally ok. You grabbed the 1st thing to hand and struck your invader once. There's no complications like 'why did you have this in your home?' or 'why did you keep stabbing them?'

IMO the ideal answer you want to give to police is "I hit them once with first thing to hand then ran away" "What happened next?" "I don't know, I ran away"
Fair enough, but wont work with all circumstances.
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#55
Report 2 weeks ago
#55
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
No you can't prepare for what would happen, you act in the moment. However, even in an unplanned act, you would not stab someone 17 times for self defence, that is what happens in a situation of rage.
Simple really.
And if a fight breaks out, then there would be a hell of a lot of rage. So that would also be acting in the moment would it not?
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#56
Report 2 weeks ago
#56
(Original post by Minxel)
And if a fight breaks out, then there would be a hell of a lot of rage. So that would also be acting in the moment would it not?
Doesnt forgive stabbing someone, mostly after they would already be dead, and mainly from behind. They took it out of self defence and into punishment/ rage. That's why they were penalised in a legal sense
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#57
Report 2 weeks ago
#57
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
Doesnt forgive stabbing someone, mostly after they would already be dead, and mainly from behind. They took it out of self defence and into punishment/ rage. That's why they were penalised in a legal sense
Well hey, I never mentioned forgiving them or that they shouldn't have been legally penalised for it. That was never my argument. My argument was that 2 people made a decision and now 2 people deal with the consequences. One of them being death and the other being jail. I put that onto myself too when I said I would take the risk of jail to do that thing that I won't mention again for fear of boring you :flute:
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#58
Report 2 weeks ago
#58
(Original post by Minxel)
Well hey, I never mentioned forgiving them or that they shouldn't have been legally penalised for it. That was never my argument. My argument was that 2 people made a decision and now 2 people deal with the consequences. One of them being death and the other being jail. I put that onto myself too when I said I would take the risk of jail to do that thing that I won't mention again for fear of boring you :flute:
Ok, I respect your decision making. Well I would if it didn't involve killing someone, but I'll try to.
0
reply
Minxel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#59
Report 2 weeks ago
#59
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
Ok, I respect your decision making. Well I would if it didn't involve killing someone, but I'll try to.
In a choice of kill and intruder or be killed by an intruder, I know which I'd go for.
You don't have to agree or even respect my decisions, you can disrespect and disagree at your will it is entirely your choice I'm not offended at all.
0
reply
joey11223
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#60
Report 2 weeks ago
#60
17 is quite a large number but as said there would be a tremendous amount of adrenaline involved. Also if the men were grappling each other for some time I can quite easily imagine a significant number of shallow "stabs" could occur before a couple of deeper wounds incapacitated the attacker. Even stab wounds in the back don't necessarily mean the man acted beyond self defence, his free arm could have ended up behind the man at one point then he jabbed it into his back multiple times to get free from him for instance. For me it would depend if forensics could show multiple stab wounds occurred when the man was already on the ground and/or if a significant number of them were deep enough to cause quick incapacitation, if they couldn't, I wouldn't say it was necessarily excessive.

In general though, I very incredibly little empathy for the burglar/mugger/attacker etc. If you go into someone else's home with a weapon and threaten them and their family, the flight aspect of fight or flight is negated as they're likely trapped in the situation. That person is probably going to freeze/comply or fight you to save their/their families lives. I don't think disproportionate force is an unexpected or unreasonable response when the victim genuinely believes you may kill them/their partner or children. If someone broke into my house and threatened me/my wife if we didn't give them material goods/cash, I would probably just let them take the items, as things can be replaced. But if despite this they assaulted us or for instance I believed they were going to rape my partner, I would clearly attempt to take them down before that happened, and I'm not going to carefully consider the minimum damage I can do to get them immobile. I'm going to batter/stab them to the ground, and realistically I'm probably going to hit them a couple more times to ensure they're not getting up while I call the police. I think that's fairly reasonable tbh.
3
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now? (select all that apply)

Lack of purpose or routine (276)
15.51%
Uncertainty around my education (279)
15.67%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (177)
9.94%
Isolating with family (126)
7.08%
Lack of support system (eg. Teachers, counsellors) (79)
4.44%
Lack of exercise/ability to be outside (149)
8.37%
Loneliness (175)
9.83%
Financial worries (72)
4.04%
Concern about myself or my loved ones getting ill (163)
9.16%
Exposure to negative news/social media (126)
7.08%
Lack of real life entertainment (eg. cinema, gigs, restaurants) (158)
8.88%

Watched Threads

View All