Home Defence in the UK...

[Boom-stick]

There is a big fear in the UK that if you 'clobber' a Home Intruder you'll face prosecution and possibly prison yourself.
Hopefully this will clear a few things up....


Homeowners and self defence - DPP issues further details of cases
13 January 2005

Examples of cases where householders have not been prosecuted for attacking intruders have been given by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC.

Mr Macdonald said: "In the current debate about the rights of householders to protect themselves against burglars and intruders, I believe it is important for people to understand what the law says and how prosecutions take place.

"The law is on the side of householders. Being burgled is a very frightening experience and householders who react instinctively and attack intruders will only be prosecuted if they use very excessive force.

"It is only in the most extreme circumstances that householders are prosecuted for violence against burglars. Prosecutors recognise that householders confronted by intruders are entitled to use violence to protect themselves, their families and their property.

"Furthermore the law understands that when people are under attack in their own homes they cannot judge precisely the level of their response. They are not expected to do so. So long as they do no more than they honestly and instinctively feel is necessary in the heat of the moment, that will be the strongest evidence that the householder has acted lawfully.

"Indeed we routinely refuse to prosecute those reacting in the heat of the moment to finding intruders within their homes. So householders who have killed burglars in this situation have not been prosecuted. Householders who have shot burglars have not been prosecuted. Householders who have stabbed burglars have not been prosecuted. Householders who have struck burglars on the head, fracturing their skulls, have not been not prosecuted.

"On an informal trawl the CPS has only been able to find 11 cases in the last 15 years where people have been prosecuted for attacking intruders into houses, commercial premises or private land. Only 7 of these appear to have resulted from domestic household burglaries."

One man lay in wait for a burglar on commercial premises, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fire to him. One caught trespassers on private land and shot a boy in the back with 40 shotgun pellets as he ran away. Others shot burglars in the back as they were escaping. Another appears to have been a drug dealer involved in a knife fight on private premises.

Mr Macdonald gave examples of cases where the CPS decided not to prosecute people for attacking intruders. He also gave examples of where prosecutions had been brought. These examples include:

Householder/other victim not prosecuted

Robbery at a newsagent's. One of the two robbers died after being stabbed by the newsagent. The CPS did not prosecute the newsagent but prosecuted the surviving robber who was jailed for six years (Greater Manchester);

A householder returned home to find a burglar in his home. There was a struggle during which the burglar hit his head on the driveway and later died. No prosecution of householder who was clearly acting in self-defence (Derbyshire);

Armed robbers threatened a pub landlord and barmaid with extreme violence. The barmaid escaped, fetched her employer's shotgun and shot at least one of the intruders. Barmaid not prosecuted (Hertfordshire);

Two burglars entered a house armed with a knife and threatened a woman. Her husband overcame one of the burglars and stabbed him. The burglar died. There was no prosecution of the householder but the remaining burglar was convicted (Lincolnshire);

A middle aged female took a baseball bat off a burglar and hit him over the head, fracturing his skull. The burglar made a complaint but the CPS refused to prosecute (Lancashire).

Examples of Prosecutions

A man laid in wait for a burglar on commercial premises, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fire to him (Cheshire);

A number of people trespassed on private land to go night-time fishing. They were approached by a man with a shotgun who threatened to shoot them. They ran away but one of the men was shot in the back with a mass of 40 shotgun pellets (South Wales);

A householder lay in wait for a burglar who tried to burgle his shed. The householder shot him in the back (South Yorkshire).

Mr Macdonald said: "These examples show that prosecutors take great care over their decisions and have done for many years. So long as a householder is not acting in retribution or revenge, the force used in self defence would have to be wholly excessive and out of proportion before a prosecution would be contemplated.

"We are working with ACPO and the Home Office to publish plain guidance to the public on these issues. We want the law as it stands to be clearly understood."

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/archive/2005/106_05.html

 

[roscoe]

A man laid in wait for a burglar on commercial premises, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fire to him

Yeah, that one is hard to defend.

Thanks for posting the actual information, rather than frothy, outraged opinion.

 

[Cromlech]

I am glad to see that some of the people who take the complaints from injured criminals, do have some sense.

The man who ambushed that burglar went way too far. That is just horrible.

 

[Punkermonkey]

It sounds like you are allowed to defend one's self in the home, but what about Tony Martin?


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anthony Edward Martin (born 1944) is a Norfolk farmer and cause célèbre as a result of his action in shooting two burglars who were robbing his home; his conviction for murder was highly controversial in the United Kingdom because many believed (and the courts subsequently agreed) the circumstances of the case did not seem to merit the mandatory life sentence associated with murder; the verdict was commuted to manslaughter with an appropriate sentence on appeal.

Martin lived in a run-down, isolated farmhouse in Emneth Hungate, Norfolk, nick-named "Bleak House". He had been burgled several times and in May 1999 had apparently lost £6,000 worth of furniture. He complained about police inaction on the burglaries. His shotgun license was revoked in 1994.




Attempted burglary and manslaughter
On the night of August 20, 1999 two burglars, Brendon Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16, entered Bleak House. In the darkness of the night Martin fired his shotgun in an attempt to scare the intruders off. Both of the criminals were wounded. Barras died in the grounds, Fearon was able to leave and got medical assistance. Martin subsequently left the farm and spent the night at a friend's house.


Burglary trial
On 10 January 2000 Fearon and Darren Bark 33 both from Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, admitted to conspiring to burgle Martin's farmhouse. Fearon was sentenced to three years, Bark to 30 months (with an additional 12 months from previous offences). Fearon was released on 10 August 2001.


Murder trial
On 10 April 2000 Martin was charged with murder (of Barras), attempted murder (of Fearon), wounding with intent to cause injury (of Fearon) and possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life.

At his trial, Martin claimed that on the night of August 20, 1999, he was awakened by sounds in his home. He took his shotgun and came downstairs, he claimed, to be confronted by a torch being shone in his face. A 29 year old man, Brendon Fearon, and an accomplice of 16, Fred Barras, were stealing from the house. Martin fired three shots in the dark and in doing so killed the youth, and injured the older man. Martin was later arrested and charged with the murder of Barras and the wounding of Fearon with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. Martin was bailed; it was claimed by police that there was information of an underworld contract on his head for £60,000.

The jury at the trial found Martin guilty of murder by a 10 to 2 majority. They had been told that they had the option of returning a verdict of manslaughter if they thought that Tony Martin "did not intend to kill or cause serious bodily harm".

Martin was sentenced to life in prison, the mandatory sentence for murder. The case had attracted considerable media interest and the life sentence shocked many.


Appeal
An appeal was lodged and, in due course, Martin's appeal went before three senior judges headed by Lord Lane.

Martin's case was highlighted by William Hague, then leader of the Tories. Hague's actions arguably contributed to his growing image as the opportunist 'Billy Bandwagon' as it was thought Martin's case had little appeal beyond the Tory 'core vote'.

Submissions by the defence that Martin had fired in self defence were rejected by the appeal court. But on this occasion the defence submitted evidence that Martin suffered paranoid personality disorder specifically directed at anyone intruding into his home; this submission was accepted by the Court of Appeal, and on the grounds of diminished responsibility, Martin's murder conviction vacated and replaced with manslaughter carrying a five year sentence, and his 10-year sentence for wounding the Fearon cut to three years, to run concurrently.


Parole applications and release
Martin was imprisoned in Highpoint prison, Suffolk. When he became eligible for parole and early release the Parole Board rejected his application; probation officers on Martin's cases said there was an "unacceptable risk" that Martin might again react with excessive force if other would-be burglars intruded on his Norfolk farm.

Some people interpret this as meaning that home owners are denied the basic human right of protecting their own property by being seen as a danger to burglers. Martin states that he would do the same thing again if he encountered the same circumstances.

The Sun newspaper ran a continuous campaign supporting Tony Martin, with one front-page headline (2nd April 2000) stating that 55,000 readers had telephoned their support for him. On the 8th July 2003 they ran another full-page article (p.9) with the headline Sun readers have risen in defence of decency, with a personal letter of thanks from Martin, and picture.

On July 28, 2003 Martin was released after serving over three years of his five year sentence, the maximum he could be held for given good behaviour, three days after Fearon was released from a drugs conviction, on the earliest date possible. The contrast lead to another public outcry.


Aftermath
The family of Fearon applied for, and received, an estimated £5,000 of legal aid to sue Martin for loss of earnings due to the injury he sustained, but later dropped the case after it became clear that Fearon had never actually received any legitimate earnings.

Martin sold his version of the story to the Daily Mirror.

Since his release Martin has appeared on the platform of the United Kingdom Independence Party and has also endorsed the British National Party, both parties have advocated changes in the law to stop prosecutions of people attacking intruders as well as less restrictive firearm controls.

Martin is the nephew of the late far right politician Andrew Fountaine.

The November 2003 "Traditional Britain Dinner" at Simpsons-in-the-Strand had Martin as their Guest-of-Honour. A number of figures on the traditional British right were in attendance, including Derek Turner, editor of the magazine Right Now!, Mike Smith, United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) candidate for Portsmouth North in the 2005 General Election and Chairman of the Conservative Democratic Alliance, Andrew Moffat, who stood for UKIP at the last two general elections, Adrian Davies, the barrister who is Chairman of the fledgling Freedom Party, and John Gouriet, a founder with Norris McWhirter of the Freedom Association. Gregory Lauder-Frost was in the Chair. A notice of the dinner appeared in the 'Court & Social' columns of The Daily Telegraph on 8 November 2003.

In a March 2004 interview with The Daily Telegraph, Martin said: "There is going to be a dictator in this country, but there are such things as benign dictators. Too much liberalism is worse than too little. The politicians as we know them are already anachronisms."

He continued: "There are things that want doing today, right now. A dictator is the way to go. For instance, we must keep out of Europe. We are a unique island people."

In a development which provoked fury Fearon was paid a reported £4,500 to contribute to a BBC documentary in 2005, Martin had also been interviewed for the documentary but had not been offered any fee.

Tony Martin's case was one that polarised the media in the UK to a greater degree than would usually be seen. To the left leaning papers he was a trigger-happy and unstable xenophobe, who wilfully killed a fleeing boy, to right-wing concerns he is a wronged man and a prime example of how the government punishes victims and rewards criminals.

I guess each case is tried differently, but in most States in the U.S. he would not have been prosecuted.

All of this is moot any way. With the aggressive gun/knife/club/just-about-anything-you-can-defend-yourself-with laws you will be left defending your home with your gardening tools.

 

[Tokugawa]

I think they should have drafted the guy who ambushed and set fire to the burgler ,into the SAS. He is probably W.T.Shermans reincarnation!

 

[Don Gwinn]

For better or for worse, the British courts found that Tony Martin wasn't defending himself or his home. You and I might take issue with that, but that's what they said.

Nothing they say about self-defense, therefore, applies to Tony Martin. That's the reality.

 

[beerslurpy]

So they cherry picked 3 cases to demonstrate that they are only prosecuting the worst of the worst. I dont buy it.

The UK still has the same fundamental problems as in previous years:
-force of the defender must be proportional to the force of the attacker. If a man breaks into your house, you should be allowed to kill him regardless of who has the advantage in weaponry. You shouldnt get time in jail because he brought a wiffle bat to a swordfight or similar.
-keeping loaded guns handy is not legal. If you dont have the tools, you will always be at the mercy of criminals who do have them. This needs to change if the british are to have any hope of reducing the hot burglary and mugging rate.
-criminals, when caught alive, are given light sentences (or in the case of burglary, none at all per official policy) and sent back on the street to victimize more people. If the british are going to completely hobble the ability of homeowners to darwinate violent criminals, at least have the decency to lock them up in jail for a very long period.

If you dont fix these three problems, nothing will improve barring some sort of miracle. To summarize, the three above problems, if fixed in the suggested ways, will 1) free homeowners from fear and hesitation caused by legal problems after the fact 2) strike fear into the hearts of criminals by arming their victims 3) still keep criminals off the street if they somehow avoid being killed.

 

[Boom-stick]

but what about Tony Martin?

What happened to Tony Martin was terrible but he shot twice, then reloaded and shot again with an illegally held shotgun and Barras (who died) was shot in the back whilst lying on the ground, I'm not saying he didn't deserve it, but even in the US I think you'd have trouble getting away with shooting someone in the back whilst they were laying on the ground in front of you?

Thats more like execution than self defence.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again the only mistakes Martin made was leaving survivors, he wouldn't have a problem if they hadn't found the bodies

 

[psychophipps]

I find it interesting how Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC selected a few obvious cases of self defense where they were either obvious accidents or so self-defense worthy that the question of culpibility was never asked at all. Also, don't forget that for all of these good incidents there are a great many more that, while not leading to eventual conviction, where certainly non-optimal for the people who had to defend their freedom from a legal system that thinks that anything but tucking your head between your legs and kissing your butt good-bye is a bad thing.

How about the granny who threatened two assailants with a squirt gun that looked real and got busted for it?

Or, my personal fav, the current quote (paraphrased) from the Home Office, "If you see a crime, or are a victim of crime, take no action of any sort and let the real professionals handle it(...after you're maimed, raped or dead...and it's too late...and we sadly shake our heads and say "Bloody shame, really' in the special British way that tugs the heartstrings...)"

But hey, they have more violent crime than us so they obviously handle it better!
Mark(psycho)Phipps( HAHAHA! )

 

[Deaf Smith]

They banned guns, they banned knives, and they banned anything deemed a 'offensive weapon'. Next they will ban martial arts. Trust me, they will do this as things get worse. After all, thugs will 'misuse' such training just as they 'misuse' knives and guns.

 

[Taurus 66]

Home defense as it stands in the UK. Butter knives soon to be banned.

 

[DWARREN123]

If they break into my home then they become dog food, plain and simple!