Jump to content

Builder jailed for a year for shooting two free jumpers


Baddbaz

Recommended Posts

So if you are a burglar you can claim you are a free jumper if caught climbing on someone's roof . If caught before breaking in ??

I don't think so . If someone is on my property / roof without my permission they are gonna get a clump off me . Regardless of claiming to be a free jumper or not .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That's a bit harsh. If they attack you fine, nice bit of self defence training for you. But if no crime has been committed and they leave when confronted, then what's the harm? Assumption is the mother of all *fruitcage* ups. I've chased kids from my back garden when I was a student (the house had not been lived in for well over a year and as such, they would get into the back garden), forced one to climb the way he got in, and the apologetic one, I let out through the back gate. They could have been about to rob the house, but that is an assumption.

 

Do I think it's right/okay for people to go wondering around other people's property? No. Do I think it's okay to hit them for doing so? No. Having chased two people from my house after they tried to get in, I can assure you, if you have any intelligence you will think before acting. What if I did purse them and they pulled a knife? What if I chased them and as I was chasing them, they're friends broke in? So many variables. It's amazing how many different scenarios pop into your head, when faced with a (possibly) dangerous situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you are a burglar you can claim you are a free jumper if caught climbing on someone's roof . If caught before breaking in ??

I don't think so . If someone is on my property / roof without my permission they are gonna get a clump off me . Regardless of claiming to be a free jumper or not .

Well, yeah. They could claim to be up to something more innocent than burglary. If the police are called, they may be arrested under suspicion of burglary but unless they have prior, or are tooled up for B&E, chances are they will be released without charge. It is hard to convince someone that you are on another person's property without permission for any reason other than a malicious intent but it stands that proof has to be presented in order to prove there is a criminal activity taking place.

 

 

Obviously from a social and moral standpoint, trespass on someone's property is not generally seen as acceptable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One doesn't justify the other. One is definitely a crime (shooting someone with an air rifle), the other is a small civil case. Don't agree with people trespassing, but don't think they deserve a kicking for doing it. If they won't leave after being asked to do so, then it can get complicated (and if they're a threat to you, you can then take steps to remove them from your property. That's defence).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Habakure's got it right IMO. Due to a quirk of the English legal system, it is not a criminal offence to trespass in most situations, which is fair enough most of the time - if someone does a 3-point turn partially on your driveway, or steps onto your garden to let a buggy pass on the pavement, a criminal conviction's not exactly a sensible response. If someone turns up in your back garden at night dressed in black, for sure you're going to want to call the police. But it would be best not to shoot them in the crotch with an air rifle unless you've ascertained that they mean trouble rather than have got lost on a jog or something, which is why the judicial system comes down hard on people that do pre-emptively 'self-defend' themselves against people that turn out not to have deserved it - to discourage other people from doing the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all about proof unfortunately. If you tell someone to get off your roof and they don't, would you climb up to give them a slap? What if the person has special needs and is having an off day. You're not to know if they're on the roof for spite or if they are scared or confused. Again, it's all about proof. If after the fact, it came out the person on your roof was up there not for purposes of theft, then you'd be seen as an aggressor. For all the court knows, you could have forced them up on to the roof. So many different scenarios, it boggles the mind.

 

So, that's why it comes down to facts. Any criminal activity (damage to property, assault etc). If there is a clear cut crime, then expect the full force of the law. Defence is fine, attack is not. Someone attacks you, you defend yourself. Hit someone for being on your roof (when there is no criminal damage), expect to be arrested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, in the colonies… a few years back a couple of illegal immigrants, I mean undocumented workers (who were also undocumented pharmacists, as it turns out) were breaking into a person's house. The elderly neighbor noticed them doing so and grabbed his shotgun and called the police. Dispatcher told him to leave them alone, the police were on their way (and, in fact, a plainclothes officer was on site and witnessed the following events). The men left the neighbor's house whereupon the man shot and killed both men. The man was not arrested by the plainclothes officer, but charges were brought before a Grand Jury which refused to indict him on the charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, in the colonies… a few years back a couple of illegal immigrants, I mean undocumented workers (who were also undocumented pharmacists, as it turns out) were breaking into a person's house. The elderly neighbor noticed them doing so and grabbed his shotgun and called the police. Dispatcher told him to leave them alone, the police were on their way (and, in fact, a plainclothes officer was on site and witnessed the following events). The men left the neighbor's house whereupon the man shot and killed both men. The man was not arrested by the plainclothes officer, but charges were brought before a Grand Jury which refused to indict him on the charges.

 

But then in the US in certain states do you not have set in stone laws about what is condsidered 'acceptable force' when dealing with a situation. Plus isn't the 'right to bear arms' also the right to bear they to defend ones family and property thus making what occured above a hard one to judge by those standards? I know in the UK if unnecessary aggression is shown by either side then that side can be prosecuted but in which state was the above and what are the applicable laws?

 

This is why I would not be so keen on living in the US, varying laws and in some cases firearms can be bought by some that really shouldn't have them as they are not stable.

 

As for in this country our laws are just so hit and miss as all it takes is one single thing to suddenly flip it on it's head. It used to be the case that if someone broke into your property and picked something up to steal if you asked them to drop it then it was no longer considered burglary, so long as they were not holding an item in their hands when they left the property and it would just be breaking and entering. Even if they intention was robbery and they handled your stuff so long as it didn't leave with them you can't prosecute for it as there is no really law for 'wishing to commit <insert here> unless it is say murder. This is why it is easy to be a career burglar in the UK as the laws are so odd.

 

Still I believe that given the circumstances of the point about this thread both parties should have been given the appropriate sentence in this case and not just one side. Given that while the free jumpers would be hard to convict though I see that based on our system the outcome is to be expected.

 

'FireKnife'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, in the colonies… a few years back a couple of illegal immigrants, I mean undocumented workers (who were also undocumented pharmacists, as it turns out) were breaking into a person's house. The elderly neighbor noticed them doing so and grabbed his shotgun and called the police. Dispatcher told him to leave them alone, the police were on their way (and, in fact, a plainclothes officer was on site and witnessed the following events). The men left the neighbor's house whereupon the man shot and killed both men. The man was not arrested by the plainclothes officer, but charges were brought before a Grand Jury which refused to indict him on the charges.

 

Meanwhile, in the colonies....A black woman whose fatal shooting by a US homeowner has prompted claims of racial profiling was shot in the face, a post-mortem examination found. Renisha McBride, 19, received fatal injuries on the front porch of a home in Detroit, Michigan, this month. Her family says she was disoriented and looking for help after having just been involved in a car crash nearby. The homeowner said he had feared a burglary, but civil rights leaders are demanding justice. Prosecutors say they are reviewing whether to charge the unidentified 54-year-old, who told police he fired his shotgun accidentally.

 

 

 
 

Dunno about you guys, but I work bloody hard for my belongings and I'll be damned if some scumbag who doesn't fancy working for his own stuff is gonna waltz into my home and take them without a severe beating.

 

After all, "he came right at me officer, I thought he was going to kill me"

 

 

Yeah nothing convinces a jury that you didn't premeditate like posting your excuse on the internet beforehand!!

 

---

said it before said it again. Guns in the house, never once thought about getting them out. if you can't afford insurance for your *suitcase* you can't afford anything worth nicking, imo..

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicking possesions is only one worry . Having a stranger/ burglar invading your privacy insurance can not cover you for . I have been both sides if the fence in my younger days . Anyone thinks they are gonna nick my hard earned possessions and personal effects / jewelry etc is gonna get hurt . The aftermath can be dealt with later .

If I have to lie to win an assault case , so be it

Putting it nicely , it will be the last house they even consider burgling ...have dealt with it before and I am happy to do it again with bells on it if necessary .

Link to post
Share on other sites

But then in the US in certain states do you not have set in stone laws about what is condsidered 'acceptable force' when dealing with a situation. Plus isn't the 'right to bear arms' also the right to bear they to defend ones family and property thus making what occured above a hard one to judge by those standards? I know in the UK if unnecessary aggression is shown by either side then that side can be prosecuted but in which state was the above and what are the applicable laws?

 

This is why I would not be so keen on living in the US, varying laws and in some cases firearms can be bought by some that really shouldn't have them as they are not stable.

 

As for in this country our laws are just so hit and miss as all it takes is one single thing to suddenly flip it on it's head. It used to be the case that if someone broke into your property and picked something up to steal if you asked them to drop it then it was no longer considered burglary, so long as they were not holding an item in their hands when they left the property and it would just be breaking and entering. Even if they intention was robbery and they handled your stuff so long as it didn't leave with them you can't prosecute for it as there is no really law for 'wishing to commit <insert here> unless it is say murder. This is why it is easy to be a career burglar in the UK as the laws are so odd.

 

Still I believe that given the circumstances of the point about this thread both parties should have been given the appropriate sentence in this case and not just one side. Given that while the free jumpers would be hard to convict though I see that based on our system the outcome is to be expected.

 

'FireKnife'

 

Strictly speaking, it was made out to be an act of vigilante justice in the news, at the time. Turns out the old guy was in his front yard when the two burglars began approaching him, one apparently breaking into a run. It was then that the man opened fire.

 

If he hadn't had the shotgun, things could have gone much, much differently. I don't much fancy the chances of many 61 year old retired AT&T empolyees against many 30- and 38 year old career criminals.

 

On other thing about US law is that trespassing is a criminal offense, here.

 

In any case, the US isn't as bad as the news makes us out to be. I mean, yeah, Chicago and WDC and NYC and Detroit are pretty bad and things are going kinda sideways in the Southern border states, but the vast majority of the US is very, very safe. In fact, even with all those aforementioned areas of relatively high danger, you're 2.5 times less likely to be the victim of a violent crime in the US than in the UK….

 

 

 

Meanwhile, in the colonies....A black woman whose fatal shooting by a US homeowner has prompted claims of racial profiling was shot in the face, a post-mortem examination found. Renisha McBride, 19, received fatal injuries on the front porch of a home in Detroit, Michigan, this month. Her family says she was disoriented and looking for help after having just been involved in a car crash nearby. The homeowner said he had feared a burglary, but civil rights leaders are demanding justice. Prosecutors say they are reviewing whether to charge the unidentified 54-year-old, who told police he fired his shotgun accidentally.

 

Sounds like Manslaughter or Reckless Endangerment to me, at the very least.

 

In any case, it is Detroit. Failed city and murder capital of the USA (and when you consider that NYC, Washington, DC, and Chicago all have horrifyingly high murder rates, that's really saying something).

Link to post
Share on other sites

In any case, the US isn't as bad as the news makes us out to be. I mean, yeah, Chicago and WDC and NYC and Detroit are pretty bad and things are going kinda sideways in the Southern border states, but the vast majority of the US is very, very safe. In fact, even with all those aforementioned areas of relatively high danger, you're 2.5 times less likely to be the victim of a violent crime in the US than in the UK….

 

I have seen that 'statistic' too. However it appeared to be a fabrication as what counts as a violent crime in the UK was not as severe as the US. Plus it was also pointed out that often smaller numbers of UK crimes ended up in a fatality while in the US the percentage of actual violent crimes to fatalities was a bit higher. I still personally think that both countries could improve but the lack of firearms in the UK helps, I would hate to think what things would happen if the UK got guns in many household especially with the way we have that whole 'all should be allowed' stance on things here. We do have a lot of stupid people here that have enough problems not trying to settle things without fist fights and harsh words, give them a gun and all would go horribly wrong.

 

As for the thread well I think many people have voiced a coherent opinion and point, feels to me like this is rife to start going off topic here, more so than it already has :P.

 

'FireKnife'

Link to post
Share on other sites

And your point is?

Read my post carefully ,,, what did I admit to exactly ?

 

before or after you edited it?

 

He wasn't saying you admitted anything. He was asking whether you meant you had burgled a house when you referenced being on both sides of the fence... guilty conscience? ;)

 

Jag:

 

At the very least I'd f'ing hope so! Accidental discharge sounds like a load of...discharge 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen that 'statistic' too. However it appeared to be a fabrication as what counts as a violent crime in the UK was not as severe as the US. Plus it was also pointed out that often smaller numbers of UK crimes ended up in a fatality while in the US the percentage of actual violent crimes to fatalities was a bit higher. I still personally think that both countries could improve but the lack of firearms in the UK helps, I would hate to think what things would happen if the UK got guns in many household especially with the way we have that whole 'all should be allowed' stance on things here. We do have a lot of stupid people here that have enough problems not trying to settle things without fist fights and harsh words, give them a gun and all would go horribly wrong.

 

As for the thread well I think many people have voiced a coherent opinion and point, feels to me like this is rife to start going off topic here, more so than it already has :P.

 

'FireKnife'

 

And in fairness to the murder rates (it's 3 times higher in the US than in the UK), if you exclude gangsters killing gangsters, the murder rate in the US would drop prodigiously. Of course, nobody cares when little Tyrone gets shot by DeShawn, only when Tyrone gets shot by Luke.

 

Just sayin'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not edited my original post in any way .

I edited my answer .

Guilty conscience no . Fact yes . Being nearly 50 now I have lived a life . Some good. , some very bad .

University of hard knocks . You learn to deal with your own , not jump to call the police everytime something goes wrong .

Society nowadays has got soft .

Link to post
Share on other sites

And in fairness to the murder rates (it's 3 times higher in the US than in the UK), if you exclude gangsters killing gangsters, the murder rate in the US would drop prodigiously. Of course, nobody cares when little Tyrone gets shot by DeShawn, only when Tyrone gets shot by Luke.

 

Just sayin'.

 

Very true, even here in the UK it is known for people to start to only really care now if the victim is white or not lowest of low class.

 

We do have a mostly right wing propaganda spewing media machine in this country though so really it is expected and we are gradually seeing a rise in extreme right wing activities.

 

But anyway I think we have derailed this thread now :P.

 

'FireKnife'

Link to post
Share on other sites

And in fairness to the murder rates (it's 3 times higher in the US than in the UK), if you exclude gangsters killing gangsters, the murder rate in the US would drop prodigiously. Of course, nobody cares when little Tyrone gets shot by DeShawn, only when Tyrone gets shot by Luke.

 

Just sayin'.

 

You say  "gangsters killing gangsters" but as you are "just sayin" you might aswell "just say" black on black violence... in any case I'm sure people would be upset if "DeShawn" got off scott free if he claimed self defense without any evidence of it.

 

Not to mention that yes, there is a difference between "Luke" shooting "Tyrone", and that difference is known as "racism".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baddbaz I was asking a question, don't want to answer, fine. Ringing the police, means I can claim on my insurance. Too many people have been "beaten up" by vigilante justice. Especially people who have had a chequered past.

 

Don't get me wrong, if someone gets beaten up while trying to mug an old lady (reasonable force), I would say it's a hazard to the life style, they have chosen.

 

Regarding the bloke who used an air rifle to shoot at some potential burglers. What if they were getting their ball back and had the owners permission? The builder wouldn't have known that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance can't replace sentimental value items !

As for getting their ball back ? On a roof without the owners permission , big no no

With the owners permission it is a different kettle if fish entirely . I wouldn't have shot them with an air rifle , I would of waited / shouted for them to come down and wait for their explanation. . If not acceptable I would have decided a course of action be it detain for the police or a a clump round the ear . Dependant on their response / demeanour towards me .

. Years ago I would have marched them back to their house and let their parents deal with them . But nowadays most parents do not take any responsibility for their kids actions or discipline them any more. .community breakdown is the problem nowadays. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, insurance can't replace sentimental items. But, if you come home to find your house has been burgled, ringing the police and getting an incident number, really is paramount when claiming on your insurance.

 

That's my point and the view of the court. How did the shooter know they didn't have permission to be on the roof. That would factor in to the sentencing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.