Man who attacked intruder freed

reply to post by stumason


In the eyes of Mr. Hussein, the criminal had been proven guilty as Mr. Hussein had witnessed him perpetrate the crime. The way I see it, the criminal was innocent until the incident, in which case Mr. Hussein made sure the criminal was to take his sentence as the guilty, and not be "proven" innocent.

@Stumason
@BingeBob

Agreed. It’s about ‘reasonable force’. I also think that it’s also about ‘excusability’ (there's probably a proper legal word) i.e. the extent to which the perpetrator was provoked into use of ‘reasonable’ or ‘unreasonable’ force by the seriousness of the crime against them. And that’s for a jury to decide.

In respect of this, I think the present UK laws on this kind of thing are fine.

But I might be wrong! Maybe we would prefer a law that says that it’s OK to bash a helpless/captured person’s brains out – instead of calling the police - providing that one (unilaterally, of course) feels that the crime they committed against oneself is serious enough to warrant this action?

If the guy had beaten the intruder even to death INSIDE the home. He may have been justified...

Dont get me wrong, anyone coming into my house uninvited is probably going to be eating .40 cal rounds and/or 5.56 rounds once they are inside...But then again I own guns

Dead men tell no tales

[edit on 20-1-2010 by BingeBob]

Having had my house broken into when I was at work and having my car vandalised when I was asleep through the early hours and the cops response to my "if I catch em then they will get whats coming".

Personally if I catch the next wrongdoer after they have succumbed to my angst they will be in the boot of my car and driven to a remote place to be left to perish.

The UK justice system sucks, just look at all the places set up to help those crims re-adjust when they get out of jail and the support they receive compared to what is on offer for the victims of their crime.

Man my blood is boiling just talking about it

Wolfie

This reminds me of "Law Abiding Citizen" with Gerard Butler.

Where in the very first scenes of the movie, the assailant whispers to Gerard, "You can't fight fate.", as he proceeds to rape and murder his little girl.

You criminal apologists remind me of this character in the movie. "You can't fight fate.", as in, you have no rights or justice at hand, receive it willingly.

No, criminals shouldn't be beaten to death on the street, but those who break into homes and tie up your relatives deserve whatever comes to them. You have every right to take your chances with the law and your own personal sense of "right and wrong", others will not take that chance and do everything necessary to protect their family.

Here is something that happened in Las Vegas, NV earlier this week. A 60 year old man shot and killed an intruder.Man Shoots, kills intruder

He feels bad about it but he did what was right.

I guess most people in the UK are fed up with criminals getting away scot free or having light sentences imposed on them. Think about the Baby P case or the Lockerbie bomber who was set free. Mr Hussein isn't a criminal but a decent man defending his family. So the thugs ran away and he caught up with them to dispense justice - so what? They could easily return to inflict more damage on his family if he hadn't sorted them out. Would the legal system have done that? Answer - NO!! They are pathetic and don't defend the innocent.


I live in High Wycombe where Mr Hussain dispensed justice. I would like to personally thank him and shake his hand - preferably the one he used the cricket bat with. Any thug, in Wycombe, will think twice about doing to my family, like they tried on the Hussains.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Circle]

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by stumason

 

Doesn't alter the fact that if the intruder had stayed in his OWN home that night or gone for a game of tennis instead of invading someone ELSE's home and traumatising the victims --- then he'd have an intact skull today

Stfumason, the scenarios you propose to "defend" your argument are horrible. Just horrible.

As has already been said, the PUBLIC was so outraged at this man's sentence; judges took note, kept the conviction but released him. Hmmm....

Maybe the justice system has it wrong. Maybe the people realize that when someone selfishly rapes another person of a basic human right, they have the option of retaliating then and there. Giving chase is then and there, to an extent.

Do you think those folks who were tied up thought the thieves were simply going to enter the kitchen, make some tea, and have a picnic? Probably not, but they new at minimum they would be robbed; however, it's what could've happen in the context of the situation that set Hussain's adrenal gland into overdrive. And stumason, it was the thieves who FORCED Hussain and his family into that context.

Soon as I and my children were tied up, along with my wife, and the thieves began rummaging the house, well; the devil on my left shoulder would be whispering evil thoughts. The angel on my right shoulder would be whispering a prayer for my soul, and the soul(s) of the intruder(s) should I escape. Big words, but they arise from the empathy I can clearly feel for Mr. Hussain and his family, and the knowledge of what I would do.

Come on! I don't know where you live, but where I live, if I walked into my house and found a person or two fooling around there, especially people I had never seen before in my life, I would note this as a once in a lifetime occurrence and act accordingly. Some people stating Hussain should serve his time talk like these home intrusions are a routine experience! Rubbish...

While folks comments about him calling up his brother and grabbing a weapon, do we know just how much time transpired between the chase and the blow? I mean come on, obviously the criminal was running full speed down the street wearing a HEAD MASK; not to hard to identify, and seemingly, not much time between flight and blow.

So all this blah, blah, blah, BS about a "reasonable" person being able to understand the "law's" term of "necessary force" or however one wants to say it....forget that! Are you feeling backed into a corner insinuating that only reasonable people will be able to understand the law?

We, the people, DEFINE necessary force, and at least for the public surrounding this specific incident, the definition has been decreed.

Props to the true victims in this ordeal for standing up for themselves; props to the UK police chief who commended the true victims and all other heroes who will stand up and defend themselves.

If you're willing to take away another individual's general feeling of safety, freedom, and happiness in a situation like this, best prepare for the consequences.

It's great to see people who just won't take....crap....anymore.

Originally posted by D3nyIgnorance
Here is something that happened in Las Vegas, NV earlier this week. A 60 year old man shot and killed an intruder.Man Shoots, kills intruder

He feels bad about it but he did what was right.

I would feel bad, too...eventually.

Second line.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Asktheanimals

 

Bit extreme, isn't it?

Not in my book. Extreme is breaking into someone's home and tying them up. If they can't run fast enough they get what deserve - an assful of lead.

No offense meant to you stu, I appreciate your points about the law and I do agree we need laws and to follow them. I was really just stating how I would react given the circumstances. I just know I couldn't control my anger or adrenaline in that situation.
If the law doens't apply all the time it's worthless, I agree with you on that. We Americans tend to talk tough I know, we do sound downright uncivilized at times. No wonder we have such a bad image internationally!
Peace out stumason

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Asktheanimals]

Things like this remind me of why we-all live in America, and not as a British colony anymore. Ifn' he had a pistol, the good fello intruder would not have been harmed. He'd be dead. Tho I must say, our current Kenyan in Chief is now attempting to disarm us, and I venture to say that is the spark that will ignite a new revolution.

Originally posted by TheLoneArcher


In my opinion, this man should never have been jailed in the first place. I mean, the intruders tied up his family. What is the UK coming to when you cannot defend your own home? The authorities say that if you have an intruder, you must remain calm and call the police.

Stuff that for a game of soliders. If my family is under threat, you had better believe that I am going to get violent. It is okay for members or parliament to advocate this, they do not need to worry. They have armed police protection, who would not think twice about opening fire on you should you be the intruder.

Opinions please. Do you think that a citizen has the right to use physical force in order to protect his home and family from attack?

A VERY similar thing happened to a friend of mine in the U.S. A drug dealer broke into his home, and he was screaming about "Killing" the home resident. Then, he made a move for the resident up the stairs, and the resident fired at him. The assailant was hit in the mouth, but the only damage he received was a missing tooth or two, and a split lip/gum. He dropped, then got back up and ran out of the house bleeding. He went to a doctor, who reported it to the police before the resident did, and they subsequently went and arrested the victim of the home intrusion for defending himself. They said it was because the assailant "Wasn't Armed", even though: A. It doesn't matter in a case of home invasion, and B. How could they possibly determine such without having captured the assailant at the moment of the crime? (My friend had a completely clean criminal record, and not even a single traffic citation either!).

My friend had to use a good lawyer just to get out of the slammer while awaiting trial, as they held him without bond on an Attempted Murder charge (Punishment is 25 to Life)! Eventually he was able to get out, and a plea bargain was reached to downgrade the charges to Misdemeanor Assault and Battery (In the state which he resides, fortunately the lawyer discovered that no case involving only a missing tooth and a cut lip has ever been successfully prosecuted as a Felony (Not in general at least), and the grounds of the assailant having busted into the house created an extremely shaky case, and the prosecutor knew it). As a result of the plea, he had to go back to jail for a week, complete hundreds of hours of community service, and attend "Anger Management" (Which btw, the psychologist came back with a report that the individual in question was not only an intelligent and well mannered person, but that he had no anger issues whatsoever. The community service folks even offered him a job afterwards). I was disgusted by the Prosecutor though, because up until that point I always grew up with respect for LEO's, and officials of the Court. I learned from my friend's case however, that most Prosecutors are actually Persecutors, and most of them care for nothing else other than earning stripes for convictions.

As for my opinion: Anyone who breaks into a home deserves whatever comes their way as a result of such. This is especially true if the intruder knowingly B&E's into an occupied dwelling.

[edit on 1-20-2010 by TheAgentNineteen]

[edit on 1-20-2010 by TheAgentNineteen]

I'm glad the guy is out.
And now they should go after the scumbag that broke into this guy's home.

I understand the arguments about chasing him down the street and exacting revenge on the guy, but I don't care.

Crimes of passion are very hard to avoid, I'm sure. Sorta like how if you come home and find your wife shagging the neighbor, you may actually get away with killing both of them if you commit the act immediately (not that I would, just using it as an example).

I can't even imagine how terrifying that ordeal would be that this man had to go through. And neither can anyone else unless it has happened to them. I don't care what the damned law states, if you don't want to have your head caved in, don't break into my house!

If it were ME, he wouldn't have ever made it out of my house. He would either be shot in the head, or have a sword ran through his throat, depending on which weapon I was closer to.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by JayinAR]

[edit on 20-1-2010 by JayinAR]

I totally agree with most people's opinions here, why should we sit back and let some nutter break into our homes, after all they made a choice to risk themselves in the first place by venturing into someone else's private territory WTF do they expect a warm welcome and a cup of tea!
In the UK it takes forever for the police to respond to anything, if at all! Our justice system is # and they know it, a slap on the wrist for burglars!!

I was once told by a policeman a few years ago that if an intruder does get into your house and you do happen to beat the crap out of them, make damn sure you drag them upstairs, apparently charges may be dropped against you if the intruder has made it upstairs, or just say, they showed an "unhealthy interest in me (if you are female)/my wife/girlfriend" - not sure if this holds water, but it's worth trying!

my suggestion is this replace those silly cricket bats with a mans finely crafted
piece of maple or other hardwood from here www.slugger.com... and if you afraid wood isn't hard enough you can buy these in aluminum of nigh unbreakable composites the composite one even has a nice thud

Anyone who has lived in an Asian community knows that they have a much stronger family ethic.
There is also a greater tendency to settle your own disputes. In fact some might say well done on both accounts.
It is not being racist to state a fact.
On ATS at least one would expect to be able to explore all avenues and not be subject to either closed minds or the PC police.
Just a thought....

Originally posted by unicorn1He didn't exactly follow through in a rush of adrenaline. He and his brother proceeded to carry out a sustained and violent attack. Let's not pretend this was self defence.
But the court has accepted he was emotionally destabilised by the incident and let him go. Not so with his bother.
I think this is the right decision.
Do we really want a society where people take the law into their own hands and extract their own vengeance?
What if you end up the innocent victim of a mistaken attack?


I'm sorry to say I think this is also a race issue.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by unicorn1]

so many wrongs, but indulge me, what is the "race issue" here, please, I am looking forward to this

reply to post by JayinAR


well said, you threaten to kill my family, then I do everything I can to kill or seriously injure you- no law in the world can make that wrong

Originally posted by proteus33

my suggestion is this replace those silly cricket bats with a mans finely crafted
piece of maple or other hardwood from here www.slugger.com... and if you afraid wood isn't hard enough you can buy these in aluminum of nigh unbreakable composites the composite one even has a nice thud

Cricket bats, due to having a larger surface area, and, very probably more depth than a baseball bat, are frighteningly good weapons. Also they are made from willow, which according to the JANKA standard test of wood hardness (i'm not making this up!) is much harder than maple.

Which is why it's so shocking that this geezer managed to snap his into 3 pieces!

[edit on 21-1-2010 by CRB86]

reply to post by CRB86


I agree with you. Cricket bats are much stronger than American bats. Willow is one of the most resilient woods on the planet. The only reason I can see that it would break is that is was kept in a very warm dry closet or over a heating duct and it dried out to a high degree thus making it brittle. I have a Cricket bat given to me by some friends several years ago and it's still hard and I oil it occasionally with clove oil. It has the added benefit of a pleasant fragrance in the room!
Zindo