• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Homeowners arrested in the UK

Came across this article where a homeowner and his wife were detained or arrested for causing Grievous Bodily Harm to burglars breaking into their home.
Four burglars, two hit with shotgun blasts. According to the article the home owner used a legally owned shotgun for the defense then he and his wife are arrested in addition to the four burglars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-19456928

Any of our fellow forum members in the UK have any further accurate details on this?
 
The story is covered in The Daily Telegraph newspaper too, and as a quality newspaper, the facts as you've reported will likely be 100% correct.

Sadly, there is no automatic right of home or personal defence under UK law. You are allowed to use a REASONABLE or PROPORTIONATE amount of force in defence, but the key words are reasonable / proportionate and how they are defined. In practice, it's a bunch of men and women sitting in a nice safe office in 9-5 hours saying that how you acted after being woken at 2 am by somebody who has already broken into your property is 'reasonable' or not.

There have been several calls over the years for an 'automatic right of defence' and that intruders should automatically give up their rights to personal safety when they enter another's property, especially if it is occupied and it's during the night. These have been vigorously resisted by The Human Rights lobby, and by the UK legal and justice profession. In the past, wounded housebreakers have actually sued householders for loss of earnings, pain & suffering etc if the response was allegedly 'disproportionate'. In such cases, being invariably poor people with no income (on paper anyway) they even used taxpayer provided legal aid funds to hire lawyers and bring civil or criminal court cases. they've even done it from prison in a few cases after being jailed for the housebreaking!

In practice, attitudes have changed a lot here in recent years. After firing a shotgun or other firearm at housebreakers, the householder will invariably and automatically be arrested 'on suspicion of ..... assault with a weapon, attempted murder' or whatever. He or she will have a hard time in the police station being interrogated for hours and their actions and motives being questioned. In most cases, charges will not be brought however. It will come down to actual circumstances. Shooting (or stabbing) someone in the back who has been frightened off and is running away will almost certainly result in prosecution of the householder as the threat to his/her life had already been removed.

Having an intruder and especially four as in this case in front of you and apparently moving towards you threateningly especially after giving them warning, will almost certainly see charges not being placed. In practice though, the householder will have to convince the police that they were frightened out of their wits, felt really threatened and any action was 100% self-defence, not a response to anger or an attempt at reprisal.

Even if the police decide to recommend prosecution (and remember many senior police officers are anti-gun ownership on principle here), the CPS (Criminal Prosecution Service) has to decide whether to take the case to court or not and there are various criteria to be met, key ones being a reasonable chance of success (better than 50%) in front of a jury, and whether attempting a prosecution is 'in the public interest'. Attitudes amongst the UK public (who provide the juries) and press etc have changed out of all recognition in such cases, and it must be an open and shut case of gratuitous reprisals or over-the-top violence being used by the householder before juries will convict now. Being seen to apparently harass honest citizens in favour of serial burglars or low-lifes is increasingly seen as not 'being in the public interest'making the CPS reluctant to take such cases to court.

Use of a shotgun or firearm (compared to grabbing a household appliance such as a kitchen knife) automatically makes such cases potentially a more serious matter and works against the householder. Other issues arise. Was it legally owned? Our FAC and SGC conditions say weapons must be kept secure and hidden when not in use, so did the householder go to a gun safe and get the weapon out after being disturbed, or was it being incorrectly / illegally stored loaded under the bed or leaning in a bedroom corner? Even if no prosecution takes place the householder's FAC or SGC will almost certainly be automatically revoked, all weapons seized by the police and there may be considerable delay and difficulty involving the courts to get restitution at a later date.

If you Google 'Tony martin shooting' or look at the Wikipedia entry for this case,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer)


you'll see a lot of the issues here so far as the UK is concerned. Mr Martin was an eccentric who lived alone in a remote farmhouse and had threatened to kill burglars of whom he was a serial victim. As a result his SGC was revoked, but he bought a pump-gun illegally and killed a teenage intruder with it. The illegal ownership and his past history weighed heavily against him, but the key evidence was forensic ballistics that suggested he had fired the weapon unreasonably. However, over half UK citizens polled on this case reckon he should never have been jailed. There have been many demands off and on since for a 'Tony Martin right of defence law'.
 
There has just been an update / discussion of the case on BBC Radio Four's 'PM' news and current affairs programme. The circumstances of what actually happened have not been released by the Leicestershire Constabulary yet, but these are the facts that are known:

It was a very remotely located house on its own.

The incident occurred sometime around midnight (police called at 00.26).

Four individuals, all men aged in their 20s and 30s, entered the property (presumably illegally, but that's not certain yet).

The householders (married couple) used a legally owned shotgun on the intruders - two were wounded, neither with 'life threatening injuries'. The householders called the police after the incident and requested an ambulance for one of the intruders. Another intruder separately asked for medical assistance after leaving the property and was taken to hospital where he was arrested.

The police are still on site treating it as a major crime scene and a large number of officers are currently carrying out a detailed evidence search around the house.

The four intruders have been arrested 'on suspicion of .... aggravated burglary', the aggravated part being for it being an occupied property during the night.

One or both householders is under arrest 'on suspicion of .... causing grievous bodily harm', that being a standard charge where a weapon of any sort is used and injury inflicted, but a lower level charge than 'attempted manslaughter or murder' which would have been used if the police believed there had been an intent to kill.

Neither the intruders nor householders have yet been charged. The police have asked the local magistrates court for permission to hold the six individuals for further questioning past the usual 24 hour period where they would either have to be charged or released. This permission has been granted, but there are further limits as to how long the police will be able to hold them.

The local Member of Parliament has expressed support for the couple on the basis that they were reasonably defending their lives and properties.

So, where it goes from here depends on the actual circumstances and so far as the couple are concerned whether their actions can be reasonably justified as self-defence, whether the police can find any physical evidence that supports or disproves what the two parties are no doubt saying about what happened.

One can't speculate in such cases, but I'd be pretty sure the police are currently getting two very different stories about what happened and the exact sequence involved. US forum members must understand that in such conflicts, there is no automatic preference towards the householder under English law - both sides will be treated as potential criminals and the possible charges against the householder are more serious than those against the intruders as a weapon was used and people hurt!
 
if you shoot an intruder make sure he's dead, that seems to be the only way to come out of it ok.

dead intruder will not sue, he will not come up with a story in his defence and a dead criminal will not cost taxpayers money, either in jail cost or attorneys.

it's a tough world, now it's either to be tougher or be dead....

good thing I live in Iceland, night time burglary in homes are rare and burglars aren't armed so shooting them isn't necessary.. criminals might be carrying a knife but even that is rare, illegal firearms are very rare and the use of them is maybe once every 10 years....
 
Well for my two pence worth, these four idiots made the choice to break the law and break into someones home. So i say good on em the owners for shooting these criminals. Who knows what they may have been carrying or had thoughts of doing once inside. If my family were inside and they broke in, i would have done the same, after all i wouldn't want to be in the news for the reason of myself and my family being murdered.
 
It is very sad to see what home owners have to go through after situations like this. It seems you or your family have to be near death to use a legally owned firearm to protect yourself. Where are the homeowners rights anymore? Do we have to wait till the house is burning down and our wife and daughter is being raped to protect our family, rights and what we have worked so hard for? Then after it is all said and done, if their are survivors we get to pay to house, feed, medical and so forth until they die or get out. What about the after math of things like this. Stuff like this can ruin the innocent for life mentally after things like this happen in many ways. I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6 in any type of situation like this. We just had on the news here today where 4 people broke into a 94 year old veterans home through his basement to rob and whatever else around midnight. Well they got a surprise when they came up from the basement and at least 1 was killed and they where all caught. GOOD FOR HIM
 
Different countries, different laws.

And in Jacksonville Florida, Monday evening August 27, a legally armed civilian ( licensed to carry concealed in Florida), while a customer at a Dollar General store, shot and killed an armed robber.

"No charges are pending against the shooter", WOKV. com said.
 
I was only 8yrs old in Nov. of 1959 when the Herbert Clutter family was brutally murdered in their home near Holcomb, Ks., 65 miles SW of our farm. You can't imagine the shock & horror that crime caused out here - folks in those days didn't bother locking the doors of their homes at night, nor did we take the keys out of our vehicles back then.

That kind of thing just didn't happen out here - but when it did, everything changed. Doors started being locked, and many a farmer started sleeping with a firearm of some sort within reach. I know my Dad took measures, even though he didn't want to alarm us kids (I had three younger sisters at the time). There was so much talk about the details of their murders - all us kids knew enough about it to realize just how horrible it'd been.

I vowed never to put myself in the position of not having a weapon near to hand to defend myself & my family, never to let something that terrible happen to my loved ones. And I've kept that vow, all these years. Not only has the sophistication & quality of the firearms I own & keep close steadily improved, but my skills & tactics with them have been honed over decades of IPSC & other practical shooting competitions. I hope I never need to use my guns against another human being, but if there's no choice in the matter....
 
What a horrible outcome so far...

The homeowners are the victims and for their trouble they get their lives put on hold while they sit in jail waiting for the police to figure out if they are going to press charges against them. Absolutely ridiculous!

Laurie, assuming for the moment the charges are not filed against victims/homeowners and they are released, will they still be looking at forfeiture of their firearms and having their license (FAC or SGC) revoked?

Based on what I'm reading here (and elsewhere) the only legal recourse a victim has in the UK is to allow the assault to take place and then contact the police afterwards. Doing anything that might injure your attacker puts you in a vulnerable legal position.
 
i didn't even bother to read the first 3 or 4 posts but I already know what it's about. it's a shame to think if a stranger should enter your house or even your property with no good intentions there should be anything to discuss or figure out. if there is it's obvious there is dangerous levels of confusion running rampant in the justice system. I was discussing with a future in law some of what was discussed in the concealed carry class and it became more clear of the confusion.
 
Sounds a lot like the stupid blame the victim laws here in Maryland. Reasonable and Proportionate? who can or should have to think of this when you are being burglarized and/or invaded. And then there's the additional slap to the homeowners face when a criminal "sues" because force was used to protect ones family and property. In my mind if a burglar/home invader illegally enters over my threshold they have nor should they have any rights.
 
And it just happened again, this time in Verona Kentucky. A 92 year old WW2 vet used a 22 rimfire rifle to shoot & kill a home invader. Reported on NBC News this morning, on my MSN homepage. One shot to the chest as the intruder came thru the door, from the basement, where he broke in.

Jones was not injured and faces no charges at this point, WLWT-TV reported.

Thank God we do not live in "Jolly old England".
 
Larryh128 said:
The difference is the Bill of Rights that the Liberals want to eliminate.

Every State wrote their own "Constitution & Bill of Rights" and each and every States is different in some way, here in New York State you can protect yourself and "home" with any degree of physical force, other than deadly physical force, Even in such case, however, you may not use deadly physical force if he knows that he can with complete safety as to himself and others avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating.
 
The couple concerned have been released without any charge being brought concerning the shooting.
The Crown Prosecution Service / Police have visited their home and checked out the couples version of events, and found them to be accurate as to what happened.
The court case which will eventually take place, may or may not have an impact as to whether the couple have their firearms certificate for the shotguns revoked (as the Police in the UK do not want a precedence set and that Joe Public can start shooting burglars and expect to get away with it - as that is the Police forces job to shoot people not J.Public).
Here in the UK being a small country we do not have the number of shooting related incidences as you do in the USA, so it tends to be made a big thing of by the Media. But in the USA it probably gets a passing comment and the vast majority of people would just think well that's another scumbag that will not do that again (which most people here in the UK would agree with, apart from the tree huggers, a few politicians, the Gun Control Network and bleeding heart liberals).
Good shooting to All (targets or otherwise!).
 
Well...in these parts if I have to shoot a so-called 'home-breaker'.......our Sheriff will bring me more ammo!!

We sent to England hundreds of thousands of rifles, revolvers, pistols, and ammo prior to and during WWII because of their misguided stance on firearms ownership and their phobia against the right of self defense in an effort to keep the Nazi's from invading their country and the English to date have never learned their lessons! ??? :'(
 
You get the rule you allow... Sounds like the Brits don't mind having the government up their butts...

Of course it doesn't help that London is the banking center of the NWO...
 
geordiesniper said:
...
The court case which will eventually take place, may or may not have an impact as to whether the couple have their firearms certificate for the shotguns revoked (as the Police in the UK do not want a precedence set and that Joe Public can start shooting burglars and expect to get away with it - as that is the Police forces job to shoot people not J.Public).
...

Sorry, but I don't understand. So the public is not allowed to defend themselves from home invasion, mortal threat, and robbery?

What I am saying is, do all Brits have a personal Police Officer armed and ready to shoot wouldbe murderers and rapists?

If I am reading this right, you feel that the arrest is justifiable, and that because the Joe Public shot the guy, you are afraid, or public/people are afraid, that any gun owner will just start arbitrarily shooting noises in the night and all hell would break loose.

Sorry, just trying to understand the view of a gun owner in the nation this incident happened.
 
RMulhern said:
Well...in these parts if I have to shoot a so-called 'home-breaker'.......our Sheriff will bring me more ammo!!

We sent to England hundreds of thousands of rifles, revolvers, pistols, and ammo prior to and during WWII because of their misguided stance on firearms ownership and their phobia against the right of self defense in an effort to keep the Nazi's from invading their country and the English to date have never learned their lessons! ??? :'(

Love the idea that the local sheriff would bring more ammo!!! But that will not happen in the UK because of our laws. End of.

Yes the USA did supply many millions of weapons during WW2 as well as the manpower which we are grateful for. But as of more recent times it is the UK Government who decides on what we may or may not have firearms wise, we do not like that, but unfortunately that is the way it is and if I or any other firearm certificate holder does something wrong in the eyes of the law then we may end up forfeiting our right to own firearms, and also may get a prison sentence.
Yes I agree that the UK Govt have a phobia about private ownership, as do some other countries, but there is bugger all we can do to change it because of the craven attitude of our policitians. Our NRA is not the same as yours and is not a political organisation. We also do not have the 2nd Amendment. Which is a pity, but there you go! It would be nice to challenge the powers that be with screw you I am having a fully automatic weapon, but please send any letters to Her Majesties Prison in Wandsworth.
Enjoy your freedoms in the USA while they last, as even you have enemies who want to take them. Unfortunately it is too late for us.
Good shooting to all.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,352
Messages
2,217,126
Members
79,565
Latest member
kwcabin3
Back
Top