man freed

fracster said:
I`m all for looking after your family and possesions, but these guys chased him up the street,understandably in anger, caught him and then hit him so hard as to break a cricket bat in three places.

Come on guys,that is a bit OTT,surely?
Click to expand...

It probably is ... had he known the cost of Cricket bats he could have bought a better cricket bat that didn't break so easily ...:thinking: I think he should put in a claim for 'not fit for purpose' ...... :D
 
hepburn said:
I wonder how many people would feel the same if they went to a sports shop and handled a proper cricket bat. Imagine the force and anger needed to break it into 3 pieces...
Click to expand...

thats a good point I hadn't considered, thats a lot of force :O
 
In the usual skewed balance of our so called justice the guy who got beat up was deemed to be so brain damaged that he couldn't stand trial, despite having 50 odd convictions already.

He obviously isn't too brain damaged to stop him from going out and commiting more crimes though...

On a vaguely related note, I see the two lads who torched a house, killing three family members got off with murder as the judge ruled them reckless rather than wicked??? Also there was a string of crimes as long as your arm, involving arson, assult theft etc etc, all conveniently written off and dropped.
You do wonder what someone has to do to go to jail these days (other than battering a burgler naturally!)
 
Last edited:
Sorry, wrong post. I thought this was a music topic about manfred man
 
Its unlikely blows to the head broke it surely? More likely they missed a few times and hit the ground? No doubt the media sensationalizing things as usual. Bet the 'robbers' just have a bit of concussion :bonk:

No sympathy for the robbers here... I bet this story makes more potential robbers think twice about what they're doing than the many thousands currently in prison...
 
towershot said:
I think he went to far, but maybe the thought in his head was that if he did just stop and hold him till the police came, they might just arrest him and his brothers instead for harassing the poor burglar in pursuit of his job to support his family..............
The world ,well ,the red tape in the UK has gone mad.......
Click to expand...

Need to bear in mind that he would have been in a highly traumatised state and not thinking rationally.
However, given that the scumbag who got whacked has since gone on to commit further crimes it would seem that he could have done with a more thorough hiding.
 
arclight said:
Need to bear in mind that he would have been in a highly traumatised state and not thinking rationally.
However, given that the scumbag who got whacked has since gone on to commit further crimes it would seem that he could have done with a more thorough hiding.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:
 
I hate all the self righteous crap "erm, maybe its not up to us to punish" sort of crap, I do not care what you believe, if somebody threatens somebody you love, there is no way on earth you would care about the consequences. all you would care about is the removal of the threat. we are not civilised human beings, we are emotionally, and instinctively driven animals, and its about time we accepted it. Break into my house and threaten my family? The very thought fills me with rage.
 
Whatever peoples' feelings on the case, and I leave mine out of it, the man was convicted of s18 GBH by a jury of 12 ordinary people - with all the facts at their disposal and having all arguments put before them by very eloquent barristers - by a unanimous decision. A decision that has been upheld by the Court of Appeal.

Everyone else's opinion is based on hearsay - mainly through the media.
 
Rozzy said:
I hate all the self righteous crap "erm, maybe its not up to us to punish" sort of crap, I do not care what you believe, if somebody threatens somebody you love, there is no way on earth you would care about the consequences. all you would care about is the removal of the threat. we are not civilised human beings, we are emotionally, and instinctively driven animals, and its about time we accepted it. Break into my house and threaten my family? The very thought fills me with rage.
Click to expand...

I think the point that many seem to have forgotten in this is that, at the time of the guy battered him, his family were not under threat. It was revenge pure and simple.
 
Photo Plod said:
Whatever peoples' feelings on the case, and I leave mine out of it, the man was convicted of S18 GBH by a jury of 12 ordinary people - with all the facts at their disposal and having all arguments put before them by very eloquent barristers - by a unanimous decision. A decision that has been upheld by the Court of Appeal.

Everyone else's opinion is based on hearsay - mainly through the media.
Click to expand...

:agree:

PS thats my number plate
 
fabs said:
I think the point that many seem to have forgotten in this is that, at the time of the guy battered him, his family were not under threat. It was revenge pure and simple.
Click to expand...

Or ,instant justice maybe:thinking:
 
Go to say, hitting him around the head is a bit extreme. I would have just broken his legs. On my property though. Seems fair enough to me.
Just out of curiousity, was it a full size bat or a kiddies bat? May make a difference as to why it broke?

Kev.
 
I agree with most people here. If the burglar is inside my house I should be allowed to do all that is necessary to protect my family without any action against me. I am the inicent victim here after all.
If however the guy escapes then im no longer in danger, and whilst i may be allowed to use minimum force to apprehend him awaiting the police arrival to arrest him, I am not allowed to cave his head in. Whilst comitting an offence against me the burglar or whatever should have no rights whatsover as he is comitting an illegal act.
just my opinion
gary
 
fabs said:
Yep, the all we have to do if we want to cave someone's head in is say that they threatened our family. Oh, wait. That's what the criminal justice system is for. ;)
Click to expand...

Well as this poor criminal is still commiting crimes, I would say yer precious criminal justice system is not working very well.
 
sawman said:
Well as this poor criminal is still commiting crimes, I would say yer precious criminal justice system is not working very well.
Click to expand...

So we should abandon it and accept summary justice? No, the system isn't perfect, but that still doesn't excuse what this guy did. Ever thought that the burglar was back out and committing crimes at least partially because of what the guy did to him? As I said, this was revenge, not justice. They are two very different things and that needs to be emphasised.
 
I never said we should abandon it, but it is high time your justice system had a serious overhaul & all those mealy mouthed do gooders were told where to go.
As to your thoughts on the poor burglar. I just could not believe I was reading that. Even if what you say is correct that does not explain why he was doing it before he got a 'batted'.
 
sawman said:
I never said we should abandon it, but it is high time your justice system had a serious overhaul & all those mealy mouthed do gooders were told where to go.
As to your thoughts on the poor burglar. I just could not believe I was reading that. Even if what you say is correct that does not explain why he was doing it before he got a 'batted'.
Click to expand...

No, my point was that he may have got harsher treatment from the justice system had he not received the battering. Got nothing to do with why he committed the crime in the first place.

I have never said I have any sympathy for the "poor criminal", my concern is that, if i0t becomes acceptable to batter these people as a course of revenge then it is left wide open for anybody with a grudge to commit acts of extreme violence and then fabricate any story to justify it such as "I just caught him burgling my house and threatening my family". Do you see what I'm getting at?
 
fabs said:
No, my point was that he may have got harsher treatment from the justice system had he not received the battering. Got nothing to do with why he committed the crime in the first place.

I have never said I have any sympathy for the "poor criminal", my concern is that, if i0t becomes acceptable to batter these people as a course of revenge then it is left wide open for anybody with a grudge to commit acts of extreme violence and then fabricate any story to justify it such as "I just caught him burgling my house and threatening my family". Do you see what I'm getting at?
Click to expand...

I do not accept the argument that he "may" have got harsher treatment. The judge should have seen to it that he DID get harsher treatment for threatening folk in the first place.

You are now going off into the realms of fantacy suggesting that we would all go about battering people with made up stories.

Seems we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
sawman said:
I do not accept the argument that he "may" have got harsher treatment. The judge should have seen to it that he DID get harsher treatment for threatening folk in the first place.

You are now going off into the realms of fantacy suggesting that we would all go about battering people with made up stories.

Seems we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...


I think we will Charlie. But just to clarify, I did not say we all would go about battering people with made up stories. I said it would leave things open for certain people to do so in certain circumstances. Bit of a difference there wouldn't you say? A little bit like that between justice and revenge. ;)
 
Depends on how you view justice & revenge I suppose.
 
fabs said:
Well in this case it's simple

Justice = a punishment handed down as decreed by law

Revenge =caving someone's head in

Seems pretty straight forward to me. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Sorry you & me are poles apart on this one.

He got a taste of his own medicine.
 
Last edited:
LOL. Well I certainly have no sympathy with the scumbag who got batted, but the court had no option but to convict the guy. He was convicted of Section 18 - Causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent. The bit that really matters is with intent - in other words he fully intended to cause Grievous Bodily Harm. The next charge up the scale is attempted murder so it's pretty serious.

Look at the circumstances - the actual threat to him and his family was ended. He's picked up a cricket bat and pursued the guy for some distance, so had plenty of time to come to a better decision, and he's still hit this guy over the head with the cricket bat. Any reasonable person should forsee the likely consequences of hitting someone over the head with a cricket bat, and the only decision the court could come to is that he fully intended to cause the injuries he did.

I sympathise and I'm glad he's had his sentence reduced but his actions were waaaaay OTT.
 
CT said:
LOL. Well I certainly have no sympathy with the scumbag who got batted, but the court had no option but to convict the guy. He was convicted of Section 18 - Causing Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent. The bit that really matters is with intent - in other words he fully intended to cause Grievous Bodily Harm. The next charge up the scale is attempted murder so it's pretty serious.

Look at the circumstances - the actual threat to him and his family was ended. He's picked up a cricket bat and pursued the guy for some distance, so had plenty of time to come to a better decision, and he's still hit this guy over the head with the cricket bat. Any reasonable person should forsee the likely consequences of hitting someone over the head with a cricket bat, and the only decision the court could come to is that he fully intended to cause the injuries he did.

I sympathise and I'm glad he's had his sentence reduced but his actions were waaaaay OTT.
Click to expand...

but the threat wasnt over. its quite often the case that these scumbags come back if they fail or are disturbed the first time round. by chasing him and giving him his just desserts he eliminated the threat
 
KryptoNeo said:
but the threat wasnt over. its quite often the case that these scumbags come back if they fail or are disturbed the first time round. by chasing him and giving him his just desserts he eliminated the threat
Click to expand...

It doesnt work like that though, he should have eliminated the threat by calling the cops, that's what they're there for. We all pay lip servce to vigilante action now and again, but it's never a good thing in practice when people become judge, jury and executioner. The mob some time ago that beat up a guy because he was a paedophile is a classic case - turned out the guy was a paediatrician! An error of black comedy proprtions.

We have plenty of protection under the law for tackling intruders in our homes and he could have taken the actions he did in the house as long as he was protecting himself and his family, killed the guy in fact, if necessary, but once the threat is over you're no longer acting in self defence or to protect your family. You don't go looking for payback, you call the cops. Soz, but that's the way it is.
 
Ok I have read all this thread and i agree from all sides, the burgler got what he deserved period there is no denying that.
The pursuer/victim in all the is should have not done what he did.

What i would like to ask though is this.

Of all the people on here that are saying they should have left the burgler to the justice system, have you EVER been burgled?? Hels at knife point?? had your house ransacked and been left to pick up the pieces???

I have my house burgled twice 3 cars stolen not recovered and property taked without my concent, and all i can say is if i ever caught the swines at the time of the event then i would have committed a serious offence to them, they are my posesions not theirs and anger takes over.
In the heat of the moment weather you go after them or do it in the house then all rational thought goes out the window.

People are just getting sick and tired of others doing harm and committing crimial acts and more or less getting away with it, i have Known people that have a record as long as your arm and still commit offences because thats the way they live their life and a few hours comunity service does not worry them.

spike
 
CT said:
It doesnt work like that though, he should have eliminated the threat by calling the cops, that's what they're there for. We all pay lip servce to vigilante action now and again, but it's never a good thing in practice when people become judge, jury and executioner. The mob some time ago that beat up a guy because he was a paedophile is a classic case - turned out the guy was a paediatrician! An error of black comedy proprtions.

We have plenty of protection under the law for tackling intruders in our homes and he could have taken the actions he did in the house as long as he was protecting himself and his family, killed the guy in fact, if necessary, but once the threat is over you're no longer acting in self defence or to protect your family. You don't go looking for payback, you call the cops. Soz, but that's the way it is.
Click to expand...

But thats just it. We do not have plenty of protection. Just the other week there was an item on the news about ASBO's & nasty neighbours terrorising women in their own homes.
The chief constable was interviewed & his response was that nobody had died. :shrug:
He should be collecting his p45.
I canna help wondering what the bobby on the street thought of him.
 
sawman said:
But thats just it. We do not have plenty of protection. Just the other week there was an item on the news about ASBO's & nasty neighbours terrorising women in their own homes.
The chief constable was interviewed & his response was that nobody had died. :shrug:
He should be collecting his p45.
I canna help wondering what the bobby on the street thought of him.
Click to expand...

Not a lot I would guess. He sounds like a complete nob, totally out of touch in his ivory tower,
 
CT said:
Not a lot I would guess. He sounds like a complete nob, totally out of touch in his ivory tower,
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that!
I feel for the folk who have to work under an idiot like that. In my view the bobby on the beat ( if we still have any that do that) has it hard enough without having a boss with a smug attitude like that. Him & those like him will cause the public to take the law into their own hands more & more. Frustration will drive them to it.
 
interesting case this, as I know the brothers, ive met them both, what I know of them would add interest to this thread, but this isnt the time or the place for it.

People who lived in the house where they cornered the criminal were told to mind their own business by the brothers when they tried to intervene, at the time of the trial there was also talk of a metal bar being collected and that too was used to beat the man, that bar was also bent by the time they had finished.. Both men were convicted of GBH with intent, both intended to beat the man, so its a fair cop, as they say. Ultimately if he had done it in his own house then it would be a different story.
 
the issue here is that they left in pursuit.
Human rights law gives everyone an inherent right to self defence, and the defence of others if in their mind their lives or the lives of others are threatened.
so up until the point the 'burglars' (which I would say is a bit of an antiquated term, this was what our American friends would call a 'home invasion', which can get you shot and killed over there!) left the house he could have got away with pretty much anything.
All the while they are a threat, they are a target.

Would I be so rational if someone did that to my family, I very much doubt it. (and I think the 30KG boxer dog would have something to say too)
 
What really bugs me is that had I chased him, I'd be too knackered to beat him with anything when I caught up with him.
I really must get fit.


Kev.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top