UK home defence

[Tez3]

I guess your a cop ...buddy you have a lot to learn seriously ...

Firstly, I am not yours or anyone else's buddy. Secondly I know a damn sight more than you obviously do, you have absolutely no idea how much I know, have seen or been through so wind your neck in. You have no idea what you are talking about, making sweeping statements which are pure nonsense. Jobo I can understand, he hates all authority figures, probably because they keep catching him and posts on here for sh!ts and giggles just to wind people up.

Please do carry on labelling all British police officers in the way you are, it's fine, it's only yourself you are embarrassing.

 

[Tez3]

oh have no fear ...when i can close my account i will as you have so much to learn ....and before you even get your knickers in a twist ...well i was a cop and a military cop so umm i do actually know ... i have never done it so don't got there but trust me if you believe that the cops do not do as I said then welll ......enough said

Thank you for making me laugh. A military cop eh and a cop, gosh I'm so impressed, and you say that without knowing anything about me.

 

[oldwarrior]

Firstly, I am not yours or anyone else's buddy. Secondly I know a damn sight more than you obviously do, you have absolutely no idea how much I know, have seen or been through so wind your neck in. You have no idea what you are talking about, making sweeping statements which are pure nonsense. Jobo I can understand, he hates all authority figures, probably because they keep catching him and posts on here for sh!ts and giggles just to wind people up.

Please do carry on labelling all British police officers in the way you are, it's fine, it's only yourself you are embarrassing.

grow up ok ....and i very much doubt that you do

but you carry on in the brill cream boys ok ........

 

[dvcochran]

I don't know if this has been discussed, or if I'm in the right section, but hey.

This is about an ongoing case (it happened last night) - I don't have specifics other than what has been reported.

So two men, at least one of which was armed (with a screwdriver) break into the home of a 78 year old man.

Said septuagenarian is forced into his kitchen by the 'armed' assailant while the other goes upstairs - a scuffle breaks out and the 78 year old fatally stabs the assailant who is 40 years his junior.

Pensioner arrested on suspicion of murder, put in the cells - surviving assailant escapes...


So, as I previously said (and was told in no uncertain terms was bad information) if you defend yourself here you're in the wrong until someone can prove you acted reasonably.


Discuss

First and most important is he walked away from the attack. Hell, just walking at 78 is pretty good. I subscribe to the saying "it is easier to as forgiveness than permission".
Not to get all legal, as officers we were taught about our curtilage, the area immediately around you regardless of where you are. In a SD situation that area is physically and legally fair game. Maybe that is different by country.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I'm super late to the party here...but if someone is arrested for murder, can the charge not be changed in the courts to a manslaughter charge, during the trial? I believe it works that way in the US (people on drug charges at least essentially barter there charges before sentencing), not sure if murder is a special case or if the UK is different. If they can, why would it matter what charge someone is initially arrested for?

If I somehow got arrested for a murder (when all I did was jaywalk), and then when it went to court the judge or DA or whomever reevaluated the charge and it changed to jaywalking, that 'murder' arrest wouldn't be anywhere on my record, and I wouldn't particularly care what the LEO felt fit to arrest me for.

I'm not a lawyer, LEO, or anything legal related, so all my assumptions regarding this may be wrong, or I may have missed a post explaining it, but I honestly don't see the issue here.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Semi-related, but reading this reminded me of the fictional story of Ronald Opus.

On March 23, 1994, a medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a gunshot wound of the head caused by a shotgun. Investigation to that point had revealed that the decedent had jumped from the top of a ten-story building with the intent to commit suicide. (He left a note indicating his despondency.) As he passed the 9th floor on the way down, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast through a window, killing him instantly. Neither the shooter nor the decedent was aware that a safety net had been erected at the 8th floor level to protect some window washers, and that the decedent would most likely not have been able to complete his intent to commit suicide because of this.
Ordinarily, a person who sets out to commit suicide and ultimately succeeds, even if the mechanism might not be what they intended, is defined as having committed suicide. That he was shot on the way to certain death nine stories below probably would not change his mode of death from suicide to homicide, but the fact that his suicide intent would not have been achieved under any circumstance caused the medical examiner to feel that he had homicide on his hands.
Further investigation led to the discovery that the room on the 9th floor whence the shotgun blast emanated was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. He was threatening her with the shotgun because of an interspousal spat and became so upset that he could not hold the shotgun straight. Therefore, when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife, and the pellets went through the window, striking the decedent.
When one intends to kill subject A but kills subject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject B. The old man was confronted with this conclusion, but both he and his wife were adamant in stating that neither knew that the shotgun was loaded. It was the longtime habit of the old man to threaten his wife with an unloaded shotgun. He had no intent to murder her; therefore, the killing of the decedent appeared then to be accident. That is, the gun had been accidentally loaded.
But further investigation turned up a witness that their son was seen loading the shotgun approximately six weeks prior to the fatal accident. That investigation showed that the mother (the old lady) had cut off her son's financial support, and her son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that the father would shoot his mother. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.
Now comes the exquisite twist. Further investigation revealed that the son, Ronald Opus himself, had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to get his mother murdered. This led him to jump off the ten-story building on March 23, only to be killed by a shotgun blast through a 9th story window.

Legal definitions are way more complicated than merriam-wester, unfortunately.

 

[Tez3]

Police officers everywhere will understand.

 

[jobo]

I'm super late to the party here...but if someone is arrested for murder, can the charge not be changed in the courts to a manslaughter charge, during the trial? I believe it works that way in the US (people on drug charges at least essentially barter there charges before sentencing), not sure if murder is a special case or if the UK is different. If they can, why would it matter what charge someone is initially arrested for?

If I somehow got arrested for a murder (when all I did was jaywalk), and then when it went to court the judge or DA or whomever reevaluated the charge and it changed to jaywalking, that 'murder' arrest wouldn't be anywhere on my record, and I wouldn't particularly care what the LEO felt fit to arrest me for.

I'm not a lawyer, LEO, or anything legal related, so all my assumptions regarding this may be wrong, or I may have missed a post explaining it, but I honestly don't see the issue here.

There's a whole load of issues there, first an arrest any arrest stays on your record, if it's a totally stupid arrest Like say your arrested for murder and the person is still alive,you can get it expunged, but if you are say defending yourself And someone dies, then that murder arrest stays with you for ever, if you apply for a job and they do a check, they will find out.

Yes you can be charged with murder and convicted of manslaughter, commonly that's the defence Put forward. We don't have plea bargains here, at least not officialy. Not do we have murder by different degrees, it's either murder of it isnt, if it isn't then it might be manslaughter or it may not, they sent alternatives i n that it's one of the other.

The issue, is can you defend a) yourself and b) your home Deadly force, The answer is maybe to the first and definitely not to the second, unlike the state's killing burglars that didn't pose a an imminent risk to your actual life is frowned upon. There have been lots of people who were defending their life, who have been dragged though a court case , that effectively spoils their life for ever, even though as it turns out, they did no wrong, in this case the amount of public sympathy for the guy, meant they dropped very quickly, others may not be so lucky

For instance a decade ago, I was as a completely innocent party attacked, by a group of men, 5to be exact, I defended myself robustly, beat of the attack using a pool cue, I was carrying as I had just been playing pool, and then called the police. The police's response to a citizen defending himself against an unprovoked attack, was to arrest me for wounding, then and then charge me and send me to coyrt, at court they just DROpped the case , in five min, literally, which is good, however that arrest and charge has prevented me from getting several jobs in the decade since

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

There's a whole load of issues there, first an arrest any arrest stays on your record, if it's a totally stupid arrest Like say your arrested for murder and the person is still alive,you can get it expunged, but if you are say defending yourself And someone dies, then that murder arrest stays with you for ever, if you apply for a job and they do a check, they will find out.

Yes you can be charged with murder and convicted of manslaughter, commonly that's the defence Put forward. We don't have plea bargains here, at least not officialy. Not do we have murder by different degrees, it's either murder of it isnt, if it isn't then it might be manslaughter or it may not, they sent alternatives i n that it's one of the other.

The issue, is can you defend a) yourself and b) your home Deadly force, The answer is maybe to the first and definitely not to the second, unlike the state's killing burglars that didn't pose a an imminent risk to your actual life is frowned upon. There have been lots of people who were defending their life, who have been dragged though a court case , that effectively spoils their life for ever, even though as it turns out, they did no wrong, in this case the amount of public sympathy for the guy, meant they dropped very quickly, others may not be so lucky

For instance a decade ago, I was as a completely innocent party attacked, by a group of men, 5to be exact, I defended myself robustly, beat of the attack using a pool cue, I was carrying as I had just been playing pool, and then called the police. The police's response to a citizen defending himself against an unprovoked attack, was to arrest me for wounding, then and then charge me and send me to coyrt, at court they just DROpped the case , in five min, literally, which is good, however that arrest and charge has prevented me from getting several jobs in the decade since

Wow really? Even after it's dropped/proved innocent, there's no way to get it expunged or sealed? That's messed up.

 

[pdg]

Wow really? Even after it's dropped/proved innocent, there's no way to get it expunged or sealed? That's messed up.

Things can be considered 'spent' and you don't have to declare them for most things, but they'll still show on a search.

As far as I'm aware, once it's on record it stays on record...

As an example: when I was 14 at school I found a cigarette lighter on the playing field, unbeknownst to me it had been turned up so the flame was about 18" long. I was messing about flicking it (because it wouldn't light) until it did light and singed a girl's eyebrows and a small bit of her hair.

The school massively overreacted and wouldn't accept anything other than me being interviewed under caution.

It was accepted as an accident by everyone (the girl, her parents, the police) involved and completely dropped.

It's still on my record, all lonely by itself...

 

[Tez3]

As far as I'm aware, once it's on record it stays on record...

Try this.
https://www.acro.police.uk/acro_std.aspx?id=180

Go through the site and you will find forms to apply to have info etc deleted.

 

[pdg]

Try this.
https://www.acro.police.uk/acro_std.aspx?id=180

Go through the site and you will find forms to apply to have info etc deleted.

If it ever caused me any issues I'd maybe have looked into whether anything could've been done, but that's never happened.

Even when I had all the checks done for working with children, the elderly and vulnerable adults (for a job a while ago) it didn't raise any questions.

It got mentioned in a firearms application, but again didn't cause any issue.

 

[pdg]

Oh, and it hasn't had any effect on getting unaccompanied clearance for MOD sites either (RAF, army, DLO) nor hindered getting the contracts.

 

[Tez3]

Oh, and it hasn't had any effect on getting unaccompanied clearance for MOD sites either (RAF, army, DLO) nor hindered getting the contracts.

They let anyone into them lol. the Navy though will body search you, not because they need to they just like to.


( no, not really!)

 

[dvcochran]

Wow really? Even after it's dropped/proved innocent, there's no way to get it expunged or sealed? That's messed up.

He must have had a lousy attorney.

 

[pdg]

He must have had a lousy attorney.

Even with a good one it wouldn't have made a difference.

For a start, "attorney" means a completely different thing here (since 1873 anyway)...

And for another thing, you are aware that laws are different around the world as to how records are kept, right?

 

[jobo]

He must have had a lousy attorney.

It doesnt work that way here.

just Before my arrest for defending my self, I didn't have a" record" of any kind, this caused the police to arrest me, at a traFic stop, as they didn't believe ( based on social stereo typing) I had no record and so I must be lying about my details, which thenGAVe me a record , You only have to have not done anything at all to get arrested it seems

 

[Tez3]

You only have to have not done anything at all to get arrested it seems

No you're right you don't but the police must have reasons to believe the person they arrest has either done something or believe that if they don't arrest the person will not co-operate. Arrest isn't being charged, once the situation is resolved, the police can de-arrest.

 

[jobo]

No you're right you don't but the police must have reasons to believe the person they arrest has either done something or believe that if they don't arrest the person will not co-operate. Arrest isn't being charged, once the situation is resolved, the police can de-arrest.

Well no, theY only need ( reasonable)suspicion not belief, which is a lot lower burden to establish, and as giving False details at a tragic stop is an offence, arresting you because they suspect the details you've given are false seems to be ok.

You seem to trivialize , arrest, it's being deprived of your liberty, handcuffed, taken to a police station, locked in a cell for hours and can have on going implication for life and work for years to come. It's not a trivial matter to the person being arrested, particularly, if the only reason for the arrest, is that they don't appear on the pnc as was the case with myself,

 

[Tez3]

You seem to trivialize , arrest, it's being deprived of your liberty, handcuffed, taken to a police station, locked in a cell for hours and can have on going implication for life and work for years to come. It's not a trivial matter to the person being arrested, particularly, if the only reason for the arrest, is that they don't appear on the pnc as was the case with myself,

'Trivialise'

You were presumably in a fight with someone and the police were called. You just see it from your side but when police get a complaint how do they know who to believe when they know nothing of the circumstances, reasons or the persons involved. Most people think the police should believe them before the other person but in reality why should they until the facts have been established. You feel aggrieved because you think the police should have magically seen you were in the right, but it simply cannot work that way.