I am sorry, I did mis read as I assummed you were mentioning Fearon as it had something to do with Martin's change of conviction on appeal.Originally Posted by lestaxi1
That Fearon had convictions, and has since had more, had/has no connection whatsoever with the charge against Martin nor the result of his appeal.
In the US if someone breaks into your house you can shoot the bugger, on the basis he shouldn't be there. Common sense.
They used to say the US had crazy laws, eveyone sued everyone else, it's not like that, and never has been, this country is by far the worse.
Keith - Administrator
We charge injured soldiers in hospital to watch tv yet its free for prisoners!
An elderly woman is jailed for non payment of council tax same day as a peodaphile is released back into community
Not as simple as that. All the States have there own law on the subject. Like some have the death penalty and some don't.In the US if someone breaks into your house you can shoot the bugger, on the basis he shouldn't be there. Common sense.
They used to say the US had crazy laws, eveyone sued everyone else, it's not like that, and never has been, this country is by far the worse.
Having travelled for 5 months, about 15,000 miles in USA, about 20 States, in a Motor-home, carrying a revolver, I was aware how very different the laws in one State are compared with another, as I was asking about the gun laws when I entered each State. In some sates Texas for example, you shoot dead a person for stealing someone else's hub caps. But Texas is extreme!
It is as it's written into the 5th Amendment (amending what???).
Keith - Administrator
So that's why when Keith the scouser goes over to the States on vacation, he sticks with Arizona and Nevada.....
If that law was adopted in the Uk, there would be no scousers and mancs left to moan about....
Did you mean:-It is as it's written into the 5th Amendment (amending what???
Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the USA:- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
If so, I am not following your point.
Sorry, 2nd Amendment
Keith - Administrator
Which is :Sorry, 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The right to have a gun is not the right to kill people.
Sixteen States don't have the death penalty.
Keith - Administrator
Sorry I had not realised this thread was being extended to USA. I have no specialist knowledge of USA law thus I don't wish to comment on it.
I have through now read something about the Klass case.
If she was told by the police (as reported in a newspaper) she was not permitted to defend herself or her family, using reasonable means, then that was incorrect.
If the people whom she feared were in her enclosed back garden and looking through her windows, then I would have thought she was probably not acting unreasonably to wave a knife at them. I would doubt that if such circumstances were reported to the CPS they would approve any action against her.
One of the problems police generally have is that many forces do not have dedicated CID career detectives. Thus they are really little more than enthusiastic amateurs when it come to knowing the law in detail. That was why the Met Police used to have a professional Career CID, who could be relied upon to know the law. Unfortunately because of petty jealousies they were disbanded about 30 years ago and the ability of the CID to professionally investigate criminal cases was lost.
I don't understand the British Law sometimes! I am afraid that someday, the government will install CCTV in our house and see if we are holding knife.
In the Philippines you can always defend yourself especially if you are inside your own premises.
No Trespassing! (if you have deadly weapon)
You can in UK too but the action must be 'reasonable.'
It is the "reasonable" bit, I can't get to grips with.
To me "reasonable" means that if anyone enters my home, with a view to steal, distress or harm any of my family or myself, by default loses any privileges or inferred legal rights and can expect the worst of whatever punishment I can mete out, if caught by yours truly.....
So they better kill me first.....
Same in the philippinesIn the US if someone breaks into your house you can shoot the bugger, on the basis he shouldn't be there. Common sense.Makes more sense actually
"10% of life is made up of what happens to you, 90% is decided by how you react"
"The way to love anything is to realize that it may be lost"
I totally agree[SIZE=4]
To me "reasonable" means that if anyone enters my home, with a view to steal, distress or harm any of my family or myself, by default loses any privileges or inferred legal rights and can expect the worst of whatever punishment I can mete out, if caught by yours truly.....
So they better kill me first.....
"10% of life is made up of what happens to you, 90% is decided by how you react"
"The way to love anything is to realize that it may be lost"
What is reasonable force ?
I have lifted this from the internet to save me a lot of time trying to explain.
There are no fixed answers. Each case must be assessed on the facts.
In some cases the amount of force used can easily be determined it was excessive. For example, to beat someone's brains out becuase you thought they might attack you. In many cases it is a difficult decision.
As a career detective I based my decisions on the law and my experience. Doubtful cases would be referred the the Met Police Solicitors branch (now CPS in which, if were still a copper, I would have less confidence).
The expressions made in general here would probably amount to far too much force to be considered by a court as 'reasonable.'
The amount of force necessary to protect oneself or one's property:-
Reasonable force is a term associated with defending one's person or property from a violent attack, theft, or other type of unlawful aggression. It may be used as a defence in a criminal trial or to defend oneself in a suit alleging tortious conduct. If one uses excessive force, or more than the force necessary for such protection, he or she may be considered to have forfeited the right to defence. Reasonable force is also known as legal force.
A person is generally justified in using force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. The person is also generally justified in using such extreme force to prevent or terminate another's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling, if: (1) the entry is made or attempted in a violent manner and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent personal violence to himself or another then in the dwelling, or (2) he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.
(Please note. I am trying to explain the law. What I say is not necessarily my own gut feeling. When I was copper on occasions I carried a firearm. I never had to use it but I was prepared to kill if the situation called for it.)
I honestly do not know how far I would go if I found an intruder in my home. If it happens years from now and I had children, the intruder would be met by aggression they would never had imagined. Not that I am silly enough to declare how I would do this or do that, I could possibly be killed protecting my family! But then a persons first instinct is to protect their loved ones.. And I would not be letting some littletake from me without a fight!
Who knows, if I sit by and allow them to do as they wish they could do far worse without me defending myself or my loved ones.
It is better to be judged by twelve than to be carried by six!
and be found not guilty
You lost weight, then...?
I've got no interest in baseball but there's a Louisville Slugger under the bed
I pay for guards around the house
Keith - Administrator
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
