Pensioner arrested after fatally stabbing burglar

[DanBettin]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/pensioner-london-burglary-fatal-stabbing-gbh-met-police-arrest-elderly-man-death-a8287851.html

78 year-old fatally wounded a burglar and has been arrested this morning. 

Edited April 4, 2018 by DanBettin

[Newbie to this]

I was just about to start a thread on this

BBC Link

Hopefully his arrest is just procedure and the murder charges get dropped, scratch that all charges get dropped.

[oowee]

Lets hope it's just procedure and it gets sorted properly.

[grahamch]

It shouldnt even be so calked procedure. We have no rights to defend ourselves or property effectively in this country

 

[Scully]

Heard this on the radio and don’t know too much detail other than that there were two of them ( intruders ) and that when one left the room ‘a struggle ensued’ between the old man and the remaining intruder, and the old man got the upper hand. If it’s as clear as that then good for him I say. ?

Edited April 4, 2018 by Scully
Spelling

[dougall]

if it is as reported no Jury will put him away.

[old'un]

They must thought a 78 year old would not put up much of a fight, well good for him, hope he gets off with all charges.

[oowee]

Good for him from me too.

From CPS

However, it is important to ensure that all those acting reasonably and in good faith to defend themselves, their family, their property or in the prevention of crime or the apprehension of offenders are not prosecuted for such action. The CPS have published a joint leaflet with ACPO for members of the public making clear that if householders have acted honestly and instinctively and in the heat of the moment, that this will be the strongest evidence for them having acted lawfully and in self-defence. Prosecutors should refer to joint the CPS-ACPO leaflet - Householders and the Use of Force Against Intruders.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

I sincerely hope that the victim, the pensioner receives all the support he should do, rather than a long drawn out decision from the CPS not to prosecute him.

[Scully]

Just now, old'un said:

They must thought a 78 year old would not put up much of a fight, well good for him, hope he gets off with all charges.

There is a saying ( an American one admittedly ) which goes ‘never pick a fight with an old man, cos if he’s too old to fight he’ll just kill you’. ?

[sako751sg]

3 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I sincerely hope that the victim, the pensioner receives all the support he should do, rather than a long drawn out decision from the CPS not to prosecute him.

Here's hoping.

The last thing an old fella needs after this is to be treated as if he is in the wrong.

[Newbie to this]

It would be a sad state of affairs, if an old age pensioner, who was held hostage by an armed intruder, goes to prison for defending himself.

My veiw on any crime like this is, if the person wasn't committig the crime, then the victim wouldn't have done what he did. The criminal is responsible for the victim's actions, not the victim

Edited April 4, 2018 by Newbie to this

[roadkill]

1 minute ago, sako751sg said:

Here's hoping.

The last thing an old fella needs after this is to be treated as if he is in the wrong.

correct, he shouldn't be in some police station, he should be at the palace getting knighted for his brave effort

[manthing]

21 minutes ago, oowee said:

Good for him from me too.

From CPS

However, it is important to ensure that all those acting reasonably and in good faith to defend themselves, their family, their property or in the prevention of crime or the apprehension of offenders are not prosecuted for such action. The CPS have published a joint leaflet with ACPO for members of the public making clear that if householders have acted honestly and instinctively and in the heat of the moment, that this will be the strongest evidence for them having acted lawfully and in self-defence. Prosecutors should refer to joint the CPS-ACPO leaflet - Householders and the Use of Force Against Intruders.

This is good.

Those committing crimes are responsible for what happens as soon as they enter your property.

The right to self defence and the defence of you home is a basic one.

[mick miller]

I have a feeling that this will go against him, that the CPS will want to make a statement about 'taking the law into your own hands' or similar. I really hope I'm wrong. In my opinion, he should not have even been arrested, formality or not.

[steveshoots]

27 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

It would be a sad state of affairs, if an old age pensioner, who was held hostage by an armed intruder, goes to prison for defending himself.

My veiw on any crime like this is, if the person wasn't committig the crime, then the victim wouldn't have done what he did. The criminal is responsible for the victim's actions, not the victim

Spot on Fella that' s my view entirely could not have phrased it better well done lets hope justice is on his side to a quick verdict of not guilty and a slap on the back for defending his own rights.

[DanBettin]

I think he absolutely should be called in for questioning given that someone was killed, that's protocol I think is (and should) be standard. But I think it should be resolved pretty quickly and him sent home to recover. The fact he was arrested astounds me, a conviction would be a shocking outcome.

Given Tony Martin's case some time ago, I don't think this will result in a conviction. It's already gone too far though, I can't imagine how shook up this man must be - especially at his age.

[sierra 11]

Civil action by "Devastated grieving relatives" i in cases like this is not unknown. Following the correct proceedure, arrest, investigation and a decision based on the  facts, by the CPS...not the police...will  protect him.

You could of course panic, not arrest him....he was defending himself we've got the right.... blah blah blah and throw him to the legal wolves waiting in the background. Probably already offering their services to the bereaved.

Edited April 4, 2018 by sierra 11
spelling

[Newbie to this]

Householders and the use of force against intruder.pdf

Key-Issues-Use-of-force-against-intruders.pdf

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-336206/Burglars-attacked-reasonable-force.html

Just a few things I could find on the CPS ACPO leaflet, though strangely I couldn't find a copy. And I know the last is from the Daily Fail, but please don't hold that against me. 

[DanBettin]

Just now, sierra 11 said:

Civil action by "Devastated grieving relatives" is not unknown in cases like this is not unknown. Following the correct proceedure, arrest, investigation and a decision based on the  facts, by the CPS...not the police...will  protect him.

You could of course panic, not arrest him....he was defending himself we've got the right.... blah blah blah and throw him to the legal wolves waiting in the background. Probably already offering their services to the bereaved.

Is arresting a necessary part of investigation? I'm not asking rhetorically to debate the fact, it's an honest question - I didn't know it was. I think he can be questioned without arrest can't he? Or am I misunderstanding?

[CharlieT]

23 minutes ago, DanBettin said:

Is arresting a necessary part of investigation? I'm not asking rhetorically to debate the fact, it's an honest question - I didn't know it was. I think he can be questioned without arrest can't he? Or am I misunderstanding?

This bit of text is from an article written about an entirely different case, but, proceurally has the same ramifications. Note the link to PACE code G.

 

This is the latest case in the developing area of law relating to the necessity of arrest. The trend for police to arrest suspects, even in circumstances where voluntary interviews have been arranged, is clearly unnecessary and has resulted in several successful civil actions against the police. This is in spite of the recent changes to PACE Code G (implemented by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Revision of Codes C, G and H) Order 2012 (SI 2012 No.1798), and in force from November 12, 2012; for the text of the revised Code see www.gov.uk/government/publications/pace-code-g-2012) reminding the police of the statutory provisions. One has to wonder whether the necessary retraining is being provided to officers in order to make sure that arrest decisions are being taken with due care and to ensure any arrest executed is necessary.

[sierra 11]

Fair question...If there is good evidence that he committed the offence, then yes, he must be arrested at the time for 'an arrestable offence' ( there's a whole list of arrestable offences ) It's not up to the cop to decide in this case..His duty in this case is..." Who stabbed  this intruder?"   The old fellow called the cops..." I did"..."You're nicked then"...

Discretion is allowed in some cases, but the danger is unless the law is complied with..ie: arrest for such an offence.. the cops would end up as judge and jury...

[sierra 11]

I repeat...for such an offence...We're not talking about arranging interviews, questionable non 'arrestable offences'  or voluntary surrender at police stations of suspects.

[stumfelter]

He won't be prosecuted as the public outcry would be massive, they should give him a medal!

[labstaff]

31 minutes ago, sierra 11 said:

Fair question...If there is good evidence that he committed the offence, then yes, he must be arrested at the time for 'an arrestable offence' ( there's a whole list of arrestable offences ) It's not up to the cop to decide in this case..His duty in this case is..." Who stabbed  this intruder?"   The old fellow called the cops..." I did"..."You're nicked then"...

Discretion is allowed in some cases, but the danger is unless the law is complied with..ie: arrest for such an offence.. the cops would end up as judge and jury...

I believe since the introduction of the serious and organised crime act all offences are now arrestable as long as the necessity test is met. Things like common assault which was previously not arrestable is now.