Drawing a line with home intruders and self defence

[GreyCrow]

Australia is such a backward joke where you become a criminal for stopping a criminal commit a crime against you inside your own home.

I believe that you give up your rights when you commit crimes. Once you enter somebody's home with less than savoury intentions l, then you are fair game in my opinion.

It is an absolute travisty that the criminal has more rights than the accused. Australia needs a 2nd amendment.

I liked this. Apart from the 2nd Amendment bit

 

[Doley4Life]

I liked this. Apart from the 2nd Amendment bit

I love my football, I love my budwisers, and I love my guns

 

[Illinois Nazi]

Agreed. However, until the intruder yields and surrenders to you when do you let off the pressure?

Excessive force =

1) Any force when none is necessary;

2) Using more force than is reasonably necessary under the circumstances; or

3) Continuation of the use of force when it is no longer needed.

Without knowing the facts of this case, I suspect they are in trouble with number 3.

Bottom line is in Australia we do not have the death penalty for housebreaking, and allowing the general citizen to decide they have the "right" to administer such is worse than someone getting some stuff nicked.

 

[Doley4Life]

You're right, arming everybody to the eye teeth has made America an immeasurably better place to live.

It's not the most powerful country in the world by accident.

For every shooting, there are millions more Americans that go about their everyday lives without getting shot.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

It's not the most powerful country in the world by accident.

For every shooting, there are millions more Americans that go about their everyday lives without getting shot.

It is not the most powerful country because every yobo has a gun.

 

[Maddhew]

Ok, so the intruder has been convicted of the rape of a teenage girl, not surprisingly during a home invasion. He has priors for drug and burglary charges. I have no doubt that past offences will be inadmissible in court, as the defendant would not have been aware of the fact at the time of the alleged offence.

Here within lies the problem the legal system. I personally would suspect the absolute worst of anyone standing in my home uninvited and would react accordingly. To me it is common sense that a home invader is unpredictable and almost certainly violent. Unfortunately the defendant will be tried in the same manner as if he had killed an innocent person who mistakenly stumbled into the wrong property.

 

[Chief]

Ok, so the intruder has been convicted of the rape of a teenage girl, not surprisingly during a home invasion. He has priors for drug and burglary charges. I have no doubt that past offences will be inadmissible in court, as the defendant would not have been aware of the fact at the time of the alleged offence.

Here within lies the problem the legal system. I personally would suspect the absolute worst of anyone standing in my home uninvited and would react accordingly. To me it is common sense that a home invader is unpredictable and almost certainly violent. Unfortunately the defendant will be tried in the same manner as if he had killed an innocent person who mistakenly stumbled into the wrong property.

So many incorrect assumptions.

 

[Procrastinator35]

. Unfortunately the defendant will be tried in the same manner as if he had killed an innocent person who mistakenly stumbled into the wrong property.

Not quite.

He's clearly crossed the line so far as excessive force is concerned, once the perp was clear of his property. But all the circumstances leading up to that point would appear to be in his favor.....He'll cop a Manslaughter charge for sure.

 

[Maddhew]

So many incorrect assumptions.

Then pick it apart

 

[Chief]

Then pick it apart

First paragraph ... I can't see the relevance. What are you trying to say?

Second paragraph. No he won't.

 

[Maddhew]

First paragraph ... I can't see the relevance. What are you trying to say?
Second paragraph. No he won't.

1.The irrelevance was my point
2.See paragraph one

 

[Bennett.]

Easy to make judgement without ever being in that position, but I imagine I would also be quite amped up and aggressive in the same situation though

 

[Chief]

Easy to make judgement without ever being in that position, but I imagine I would also be quite amped up and aggressive in the same situation though

Yes, but the consequences of chasing someone out of your house and beating them up so badly they die are set out in law.

 

[AM]

I'd work on the basis that anyone who has chosen to break into your home has the worst intentions. It's 2am and you are asleep and have kids in the house. Wake up to the noise of an intruder. You have no idea who they are, what they are armed with or their criminal history. If the crook dies, so be it. I imagine in this instance, the police believe the crook may have been killed whilst being detained and at a time when he was no longer a threat. Well he's no threat no more. Any criminal lawyers on here care to advise how the courts generally see these sort of cases?

We'd all hate to be placed in that circumstance and would probably go hard. The unfortunate thing is the force you use has to be proportionate I believe.

 

[coerced]

Yes, but the consequences of chasing someone out of your house and beating them up so badly they die are set out in law.

What if the blokes pants were down a la the circumstances of his rape conviction?

Still not sure how the event constitutes murder as opposed to manslaughter.

 

[Bennett.]

Yes, but the consequences of chasing someone out of your house and beating them up so badly they die are set out in law.

yes, but in reality adrenaline, emotion etc easily kick in

 

[kane249]

At first glance you think ok he was just protecting his wife and daughter, but for him to chase him into the street and continue on with the beating is what will ultimately get him convicted IMO.

To draw a long bow in comparison, it's like how nightclubs tell their bouncers not to pursue patrons into the street/sidewalk to continue on with a fight. Once they are out of the clubs boundaries, then they are no longer on their private property and it's a public matter.

 

[GreyCrow]

What if the blokes pants were down a la the circumstances of his rape conviction?

Still not sure how the event constitutes murder as opposed to manslaughter.

I think a manslaughter conviction would be likely ( given the circumstances). It will up to his lawyer and the prosecution in submissions to ask for a lesser time in prison

 

[Present Not Past]

Who's said he was beaten out on the street? They may have just been attempting to restrain him until the Police arrived.
I think the outcome of this case will rely on the testimony of witnesses to the event.

 

[skilts]

I once tried drawing a line with a home intruder. It was a shambles. We were both too nervous to draw it straight.

 

[skilts]

I think the outcome of this case will rely on the testimony of witnesses to the event.

That's a big call. Are you seriously saying that the evidence of eye witnesses will have relevance in this case?

 

[skilts]

To draw a long bow in comparison,

This thread is about drawing lines, not long bows.

 

[Present Not Past]

That's a big call. Are you seriously saying that the evidence of eye witnesses will have relevance in this case?

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit - Oscar Wilde.

 

[Present Not Past]

This thread is about drawing lines, not long bows.

 

[rank and file]

What if its police trespassing on your property?

They're armed

Reminds me of when VicPol were going around shooting lots of crims in the late 80s early 90s.They waited in a house and shot the guy when he broke in, apparently he went at them with a knife.