myleen klass

[maria_and_matt]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sho...e_At_Teenagers

so stupid that she was warned by police!

[bornatbirth]

intruders have rights too?

considersing that she was assaulted before by teens, imsurprised she hasn't got a loaded gun at home.

[maria_and_matt]

intruders have rights too?

considersing that she was assaulted before by teens, imsurprised she hasn't got a loaded gun at home.

she was assaulted :O i didnt know that

[KeithD]

You need to hold the machete, and 1/2 a sliced carrot in the other, then it is not classed as a dangerous weapon Without the carrot it is

[bornatbirth]

You need to hold the machete, and 1/2 a sliced carrot in the other, then it is not classed as a dangerous weapon Without the carrot it is

or you dont tell no one

[les_taxi]

what is this country coming to!
If I was in power I would say that any intruder breaking into someones house forfits all their human rights.
Anything what happens to the intruder is tough luck and it would be illegal to bring any charges against the householder.
So the message would be ok we cant always stop you robbing *******s breaking in but once you have done so you have no human rights and any injurys you sustain you won't be booking an appointment with injury lawyers for us

[KeithD]

or you dont tell no one

Bit difficult explaining it to no one with the guys head rolling around the kitchen floor

[triple5]

Spot on Les Every person should have the right to defend their home however they see fit. Makes you wonder what these coppers are thinking when they dish out these warnings I know they're just following rules, but I'd be cringing inside.

[joebloggs]

only in the uk

had the cheeky gone to the police complaining that she waved a knife at them?, their trespassing on her property, peering thru her window at midnight the cops should have arrested them

Hertfordshire Police officers warned Klass she should not have used a knife to scare off the teens because carrying an "offensive weapon" - even in her own home - was illegal.

you can't even have a knife in your own kitchen any more, what are you going to wave at them, like scouser keith has said a carrot or stick of celery

[johncar54]

English law permits a person to take the life of another to protect their, life or property or that of another. But the action taken must be considered reasonable in the circumstances.


The problem with highlighted cases where a person has been charge, Tony Martin the farmer and the recent case where the owner of a house and his brother chasing the intruders down the street, is that it was not reasonable in the circumstances.

Had Martin shot the intruder in defence of his life or property or had the other guy attacked the intruder whilst he was in his home, the result would have bean different.-

The law is there to prevent anyone unreasonably taking the law into their own hands, For example, If I see a guy on the street who broke into my home a week before, to attack him would be unlawful. There is also the problem of mistaken identity.


In this case, if the people outside had entered the house, the owner would have been justified in taking reasonable action, that might have included picking up the knife and even killing the intruders, but they were outside and she was in no immediate danger.

[South-east boy]

only in the uk

had the cheeky gone to the police complaining that she waved a knife at them?, their trespassing on her property, peering thru her window at midnight the cops should have arrested them

Hertfordshire Police officers warned Klass she should not have used a knife to scare off the teens because carrying an "offensive weapon" - even in her own home - was illegal.

you can't even have a knife in your own kitchen any more, what are you going to wave at them, like scouser keith has said a carrot or stick of celery

How much more ridiculous is this country going to get?! Just crazy!

[johncar54]

How much more ridiculous is this country going to get?! Just crazy!

Please see my post just before this one

And Joe trespassing on her property There is NO criminal offence of trespass in the UK.

If I walk into your house, (with no criminal intent) sit in your favourite chair and watch the TV which is on, I do not commit any offence in UK.

[joebloggs]

In this case, if the people outside had entered the house, the owner would have been justified in taking reasonable action, that might have included picking up the knife and even killing the intruders, but they were outside and she was in no immediate danger.

so a young woman alone at midnight apart from her 2yr old kid has to wait for someone to break in before she is in danger?

what would you do if scouser keith and his scouser mates were outside your window at midnight ?

john i understand what you said about the other case, like the farmer guy who shot the 2 kids in the back who had broke into his house, they were running away. but if he shot them from their front and they had a knife ?

so with the same reasoning those outside the window were in no immediate danger from mylenne. and how does she know those outside didn't have some sort of weapon ?

[Dedworth]

what is this country coming to!
If I was in power I would say that any intruder breaking into someones house forfits all their human rights.
Anything what happens to the intruder is tough luck and it would be illegal to bring any charges against the householder.
So the message would be ok we cant always stop you robbing *******s breaking in but once you have done so you have no human rights and any injurys you sustain you won't be booking an appointment with injury lawyers for us

Whatever became of this hollow New Labour promise - "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"?

We need a return of the rope , cane and longer deterrent jail sentences in prisons that put the fear of god into criminals. Also while we are at it bin the European Convention on Human Rights.

[johncar54]

so with the same reasoning those outside the window were in no immediate danger from mylenne. and how does she know those outside didn't have some sort of weapon ?


But for an offence of possessing a offensive weapon nobody needs to be threatened. It they were that would be yet another offence.

IF a person is stopped carrying anything and he says something to the effect that he will use it protect himself, then whatever it is becomes an offensive weapon.

[KeithD]

By the time the police turn up these days the stab wounds would have healed

[bornatbirth]

In this case, if the people outside had entered the house, the owner would have been justified in taking reasonable action, that might have included picking up the knife and even killing the intruders, but they were outside and she was in no immediate danger.

john,you missed out the fact,that she already got assaulted before and wasn't going to take any chance's as she felt she was in danger?

[Ping]

Well, as what I said before if the law in this country is the same as in Singapore no one
tries to commit any crime.The problem is the the law in this country can be bend or in other words it,s pliant like a bamboo.

Or like in Davao city mayor Duterte will give warning all those muggers, addict and other criminals to go away or else if they were caught they will vanished on the face of earth without questions or in other place if the police can not do the job the vigilantes can.

[Dedworth]

Well, as what I said before if the law in this country is the same as in Singapore no one
tries to commit any crime.The problem is the the law in this country can be bend or in other words it,s pliant like a bamboo.

Or like in Davao city mayor Duterte will give warning all those muggers, addict and other criminals to go away or else if they were caught they will vanished on the face of earth without questions or in other place if the police can not do the job the vigilantes can.

Is Davao twinned with Maricopa Arizona ? - Sheriff Joe has some good methods of dealing with scum

http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=Home

Like you though I feel Singapore is the standard to aspire to

[KeithD]

Is Davao twinned with Maricopa Arizona ? - Sheriff Joe has some good methods of dealing with scum

http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=Home

He makes the prisoners wear pink underwear We hear a lot about him when we are in the area.

[johncar54]

Bornatbirth john,you missed out the fact,that she already got assaulted before and wasn't going to take any chance's as she felt she was in danger?

That is not relevant. According to the facts of this event (as understood by the police) she was not acting reasonably in the circumstances.

I got attacked and beaten up when I was 14, it did not give me the right to go out armed (for the rest of my life). If a Spaniard's rude to my wife it does not mean that I can be rude to every Spaniard as they maybe racists, and so on.

[KeithD]

That is not relevant. According to the facts of this event (as understood by the police) she was not acting reasonably in the circumstances.

So we have no right to self defense with regard to tolling ourselves up for protection..... I love this country

Actually I know plenty of criminals who have had heads kicked in by the victim, been stabbed, shot, thrown in rivers, the police do sod all. Eye for an eye, and they can't be bothered with the paperwork for scum.

[johncar54]

So we have no right to self defence with regard to tooling ourselves up for protection .

Exactly.

But as I have said, several times before, in English law one can use reasonable force to protect themselves, their property or any other persons life or property and that can include taking the life of another person.

[aromulus]

Exactly.

But as I have said, several times before, in English law one can use reasonable force to protect themselves, their property or any other persons life or property and that can include taking the life of another person.

And what may "reasonable force" be, if I may ask...?

[KeithD]

And what may "reasonable force" be, if I may ask...?

That my dear friend depends on the police officer involved, who reads the CPS case, and finally which judge you get..... Kind of a lucky dip really

[les_taxi]

English law permits a person to take the life of another to protect their, life or property or that of another. But the action taken must be considered reasonable in the circumstances.


The problem with highlighted cases where a person has been charge, Tony Martin the farmer and the recent case where the owner of a house and his brother chasing the intruders down the street, is that it was not reasonable in the circumstances.

Had Martin shot the intruder in defence of his life or property or had the other guy attacked the intruder whilst he was in his home, the result would have bean different.-

The law is there to prevent anyone unreasonably taking the law into their own hands, For example, If I see a guy on the street who broke into my home a week before, to attack him would be unlawful. There is also the problem of mistaken identity.


In this case, if the people outside had entered the house, the owner would have been justified in taking reasonable action, that might have included picking up the knife and even killing the intruders, but they were outside and she was in no immediate danger.

Tony martin gets my vote
So by if i see the ******* who raped my daughter a week later in the street dya think i'm gonna let him walk on he would be dead meat .... the law.

also you say the people were outside and she was in no immediate danger-how do you know that?
Well the counter arguement would be she was inside so there was no immediate danger to them!
We are becoming a nation run by injury lawyers for you,common sense and disipline out of the window.
I say it once again dont commit the crime then we wont have this problem in the first place,if you do be prepaired to take the conscequences

[johncar54]

Tony martin gets my vote
So by if i see the ******* who raped my daughter a week later in the street dya think i'm gonna let him walk on he would be dead meat .... the law.

also you say the people were outside and she was in no immediate danger-how do you know that?
Well the counter arguement would be she was inside so there was no immediate danger to them!
We are becoming a nation run by injury lawyers for you,common sense and disipline out of the window.
I say it once again dont commit the crime then we wont have this problem in the first place,if you do be prepaired to take the conscequences

OK so in the first place, you would have put yourself in Tony Martin's position by saying you would kill the guy, thus you would be convicted of murder. That why he was convicted of murder, there was proof he intended to kill.

Offensive weapon possession has nothing to do with people being threatened, if they were that be another charge too. It is possession.

[les_taxi]

OK so in the first place, you would have put yourself in Tony Martin's position by saying you would kill the guy, thus you would be convicted of murder. That why he was convicted of murder, there was proof he intended to kill.

Offensive weapon possession has nothing to do with people being threatened, if they were that be another charge too. It is possession.

The charge was reduced to manslaughter.Since then Brendon Fearon, the other burglar has been convicted of other offences and don't forget to this low life scum never admitted to poilice he had a seriously wounded acomplice who was in need of urgent medical help.

Tony martin had had enough of being threatened and burgled and as far as i am concerened he was justified in his actions.

Like i said before if you threaten and terrorise and rob people then if you get nailed so be it. work for a living like the rest of us do.

[johncar54]

Tony Martin was convicted of murder on a 10 to 2 majority by the jury. They rejected the opportunity to find him guilty of manslaughter.

(Wikipedia) An appeal was considered in October 2001 by three senior judges headed by Lord Lane. Submissions by the defence that Martin had fired in self defence were rejected by the appeal court. However, 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 was replaced by manslaughter carrying a five year sentence, and his ten year sentence for wounding Fearon was reduced to three years. These sentences were to run concurrently.

It was not because Fearon had previous convictions.

If Martin had not shouted his mouth off previously that he intended to kill anyone who burgled his farm, and of he had shot him in the front (coming towards him) he would probably never have been charged and for sure he would never have been convicted of murder.

[les_taxi]

Tony Martin was convicted of murder on a 10 to 2 majority by the jury. They rejected the opportunity to find him guilty of manslaughter.

(Wikipedia) An appeal was considered in October 2001 by three senior judges headed by Lord Lane. Submissions by the defence that Martin had fired in self defence were rejected by the appeal court. However, 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 was replaced by manslaughter carrying a five year sentence, and his ten year sentence for wounding Fearon was reduced to three years. These sentences were to run concurrently.

It was not because Fearon had previous convictions.

If Martin had not shouted his mouth off previously that he intended to kill anyone who burgled his farm, and of he had shot him in the front (coming towards him) he would probably never have been charged and for sure he would never have been convicted of murder.

You not reading my post properly,I said the sentenced was reduced to manslaughter and i said since the offence fearon has commited further crimes.
nothing to do with the original offence.