Man cleared of murdering trespasser in home with garden shears

....... · 15-03-2018 01:08PM

This post has been deleted.

rick_shaw · 15-03-2018 01:10PM

pilly wrote: »

The fact that people actually want to beat another human being to death. Even fantasising about what they would do to them even if they were retreating. A little bit sick imo.

Also, I doubt half of the posters here even read the article. If they did they would see that this was a clear case of over the top retaliation.

1. Who keeps half a shears to hand?
2. It went through both the mans lungs
3. It appears they actually knew each other

It's certainly not as clear cut as everyone here seems to think it is.

Also, what's hilarious is that travellers get condemned for everything on Boards but all of a sudden they're heroes??? Give me a break.

agree entirely

apart from the foggy and dubious testimony which casts doubt on how surprised he was to see this now dead person , the defendant engaged in savage violence to " defend " himself

15-03-2018 01:10PM

pilly wrote: »

So are we going to start giving the death sentence out for burglary now?

Creep around my infant at 3am in their bedroom in the dead of night and yes probably.

conor2469 · 15-03-2018 01:11PM

I, for one, welcome our new shear-wielding traveller overlords

rick_shaw · 15-03-2018 01:24PM

amazing just how violent travellers are , i knew they were already but its always a shock

when i was a kid , i remember my grandad had tinkers in painting his haysheds on his farm , the tinkers used to beat the crap out of each other every hour or so and then go back to work like it never happened , they resort to violence over everything

those tinkers didnt rip him off like the painters do today so he got them back every few years to paint his farm sheds

15-03-2018 01:44PM

save us from the shocked and saddened who only exist to tut-tut at the baseness of their fellow message board posters

yerman wasnt walking down the street whistling, i wont clutch any pearls over his loss or any like him

o1s1n · 15-03-2018 01:58PM

seamus wrote: »

Yes.

"I believe if someone has broken into your home and is still inside your property you should be entitled to shoot them in the back of the head as they try to run away

If you catch somebody breaking into your home you should own them, you should be allowed to do what you want to them without the law getting involved. If you want to stop a burglar leaving your home so you can beat them for longer that's totally acceptable in my books".

There's "I'm defending my home because I personally feel threatened", and then there's just violence porn fantasies like the above where people believe that their hoarded resources are more valuable than someone else's life.

Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the above posts weren't just hyperbolic internet keyboard warrior vigilante fantasies. I seriously doubt more than a select few people would actually act that way in reality.

seamus wrote: »

That's not what I'm talking about though. I'm not talking about coming out of your bedroom in your jocks and giving a wallop with a baseball bat to make the threat go away. That's understandbale. I'm talking about deliberate actions to kill someone in your home regardless of their actual intent or state.

I think we pretty much agree, we're just coming at it in two different angles. I agree that people shouldn't be acting like a psychopathic Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone, however I don't think people should be prosecuted for defending their home and no situation should ever exist where they feel they have to 'hold back' for fear of what the authorities might do to them. Adrenaline can make you do some mad things in the moment, especially when you feel your family is under threat.

On the possession thing, that really boils down to your own personal feelings of possessions etc. Not everyone feels like that. I have some items that are completely irreplaceable and if I came home to find someone stealing them I doubt I'd stand back while they stroll out of the house with it under their arm.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 15-03-2018 02:02PM

FTA69 wrote: »

You'd want to be on some serious gear to think burgling a caravan in Dunsink Lane is a good idea.

Yeah that was my first thought too, it'd nearly make you believe the "invited in" story. I know they'd been drinking but that's so stupid as to be suicidal. Were the deceased and his partner travellers? Wouldn't have thought so from the names, and unmarried drug users shacked up wouldn't be tolerated on most sites ime, though some of the ones around there, I dunno.

The injuries inflicted are horrific, but Mr Keenan (who was only a teenager when this happened) is a big guy. I suppose adrenaline pumping, split second decisions and so on. From my reading the deceased had his arm raised and it went in under his armpit, he could well have meant to hit him but not kill him.

GarIT · 15-03-2018 02:19PM

o1s1n wrote: »

Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the above posts weren't just hyperbolic internet keyboard warrior vigilante fantasies. I seriously doubt more than a select few people would actually act that way in reality.

I said it and I meant it. The real point though wasn't that we should be torturing burglars but that I disagree with the idea of "reasonable force". If somebody has broken into your home any amount of force should be considered reasonable.

If somebody dies and forensics come in and determine that it was definitely a burglary I think no questions should be asked about the circumstances of the death. If a burglar dies during a burglary there should be no questioning, no arrest, no court case, the homeowner shouldn't have to explain how they died or prove that it was reasonable. i.e. The death of a burglar should always be considered reasonable regardless of circumstances.

15-03-2018 02:19PM

seamus wrote: »

We've all heard stories about people waking up to find a drunk naked stranger sitting on the toilet because they went into the wrong house.

That's a new one on me. Anyway, lock your doors and stuff like that won't happen. If someone intentionally breaches the security measures you've installed to protect your family, then screw them if they're met with a reaction. I wouldn't mourn for them anyway.

Zubeneschamali · 15-03-2018 02:20PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Those people are putting themselves in legal jeopardy if they actually use an offensive weapon kept in the bedroom for this purpose on a burglar - it suggests premeditation.

I would suggest at least pretending that the bat is in your bedroom because your kids leave stuff everywhere. No-one will believe it, but the jury will pretend to.

sbsquarepants · 15-03-2018 02:23PM

o1s1n wrote: »

Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the above posts weren't just hyperbolic internet keyboard warrior vigilante fantasies..

I'd be very surprised if they are to be honest.

o1s1n wrote: »

On the possession thing, that really boils down to your own personal feelings of possessions etc. Not everyone feels like that. I have some items that are completely irreplaceable and if I came home to find someone stealing them I doubt I'd stand back while they stroll out of the house with it under their arm.

I couldn't really give a toss about my possessions - that's what insurance is for. What I'd be worried about is my kids and my missus getting hurt, either purposely by some scummer or accidentally - for exampled getting trampled in a row or getting knocked down the stairs by someone running out or anything like that.

Long story short, if I find you in my house, I am going to do my absolute utmost to incapacitate you by whatever way or means I can. I have zero concern for your safety / life. That's just how it is. If a knife, hammer, hatchet, whatever comes to hand, you're getting a smack of it and fúck the consequences.

Manic Moran · 15-03-2018 02:52PM

baylah17 wrote: »

No, it does say what YOU believe is reasonable force, Reasonable Force is defined in law as such force as a reasonable person would deem necessary, which is quite different

Actually, in this case there is a caveat. Quoting Justice Hardiman again.

It is, of course, impossible to lay down any formula with which the degree of force can be instantly calculated. Nor, in our view, would it be just to lay down a wholly objective standard, to be judged by the standards of the hypothetical reasonable person.

The victim of a burglary is not in the position of an ordinary reasonable man or woman contemplating what course of action is best in particular circumstances. He may be (and Mr. Forrestal actually was) aging, alone, confronted with numerous and/or much younger assailants (Barnes was almost exactly fifty years younger than his victim). In almost every case the victim of burglary will be taken by surprise. The victim will, therefore, be in almost every case shocked and surprised and may easily be terrified out of his wits. To hold a person in this situation to an objective standard would be profoundly unjust.

[...]

But it must always be borne in mind that the burglar must take the occupant as he finds him and that in many cases it will in practice take the deployment of grossly disproportionate force, or evidence of actual malice (as in the well known Martin case in Great Britain) to fix the householder with liability. He or she has, after all, been deliberately subjected to an experience which will shock even the most robust and might make many irrational with terror

[...]His act of burglary is the first (and very grave) wrong. At Common Law the householder would have been entitled to kill him. Since however the Common Law must be regarded as overruled in that particular regard by the respect for life expressed in Article 40 of the Constitution, it follows that there must be some scope for self defence by a burglar. That scope, however, is very limited, to defence against an attempt by the householder to kill the burglar simply for being a burglar.

dan1895 · 15-03-2018 02:52PM

Amazing the amount of people jumping to the defence of the perpatrator.

LadyMacBeth_ · 15-03-2018 02:55PM

dan1895 wrote: »

Amazing the amount of people jumping to the defence of the perpatrator.

We're actually all part of a burglars' union.

15-03-2018 02:56PM

dan1895 wrote: »

Amazing the amount of people jumping to the defence of the perpatrator.

They'd probably sooner invite the perp into the bed with their missus!

It's gas. They call those willing to defend their homes, families etc violent fantasists or internet hard men but I mean if you're not going to do anything for the sake of your loved ones, who are you gonna do it for? How does that make you a hard man?!

BattleCorp · 15-03-2018 02:56PM

GarIT wrote: »

If somebody has broken into your home any amount of force should be considered reasonable.

While I believe you should be able to use whatever force is necessary, I think the important word is necessary. There may be times that you need to use lethal force, and there are times that you may not need to use lethal force.

If you catch a 10 year old stealing jewellery from your bedroom, you shouldn't be able to beat him to death with a lead pipe. It isn't necessary in that instance to protect yourself or your property.

If that 10 year old is armed with a syringe full of blood, then yeah, swing away with the lead pipe.

Now I know that the above is an unlikely scenario but I'm just using it as a way of showing that killing someone isn't always reasonable.

garbo speaks · 15-03-2018 02:57PM

Any burglar or trespasser into someone's property should be fair game to kill.

....... · 15-03-2018 03:03PM

This post has been deleted.

Dr_Bill · 15-03-2018 03:06PM

garbo speaks wrote: »

Any burglar or trespasser into someone's property should be fair game to kill.

I disagree. It has to be reasonable. Let's say you don't get on with your neighbours, one day your neighbour decides to cut some vegetation on your side, you gonna smash their head in just because you happened to have a shovel to hand?

Same thing is a burglar is in your home and you manage to say kick them against a wall and knock them out cold, you go down to the kitchen and fetch a knife and stab them and end up killing them. Let the court decide then if that was reasonable.

GarIT · 15-03-2018 03:07PM

BattleCorp wrote: »

While I believe you should be able to use whatever force is necessary, I think the important word is necessary. There may be times that you need to use lethal force, and there are times that you may not need to use lethal force.

If you catch a 10 year old stealing jewellery from your bedroom, you shouldn't be able to beat him to death with a lead pipe. It isn't necessary in that instance to protect yourself or your property.

If that 10 year old is armed with a syringe full of blood, then yeah, swing away with the lead pipe.

Now I know that the above is an unlikely scenario but I'm just using it as a way of showing that killing someone isn't always reasonable.

I look at it a different way. The homeowner or related person should be able to use whichever response creates the most safety for them. If I find someone looking through my drawers and they haven’t noticed me I could shout at them and that might be enough to get rid of them or they might come after me, or I could try to tackle them/fight them/try to drag them out but they might fight back, either of those responses put me at risk. If I kill them before they have the opportunity to escalate I am safe. It wouldn’t be necessary to kill them straight away but it creates the most safety for me if they are dead.

garbo speaks · 15-03-2018 03:09PM

Dr_Bill wrote: »

Same thing is a burglar is in your home and you manage to say kick them against a wall and knock them out cold, you go down to the kitchen and fetch a knife and stab them and end up killing them. Let the court decide then if that was reasonable.

I for one would do exactly that. Any burglar who would break into my home would not be coming out alive.

pilly · 15-03-2018 03:11PM

It's amazing that we don't hear of dead burglars every day. :rolleyes:

GarIT · 15-03-2018 03:11PM

Dr_Bill wrote: »

I disagree. It has to be reasonable. Let's say you don't get on with your neighbours, one day your neighbour decides to cut some vegetation on your side, you gonna smash their head in just because you happened to have a shovel to hand?

Same thing is a burglar is in your home and you manage to say kick them against a wall and knock them out cold, you go down to the kitchen and fetch a knife and stab them and end up killing them. Let the court decide then if that was reasonable.

In your home or trying to get into your home and in your garden are two different things.

If you leave them without killing them you are risking them waking up and being a danger to you. You should be able to kill them to guarantee you are safe even if they are currently unconscious.

BattleCorp · 15-03-2018 03:11PM

garbo speaks wrote: »

I for one would do exactly that. Any burglar who would break into my home would not be coming out alive.

You seem pretty confident there that you would have what it takes to kill a burglar.

GMSA · 15-03-2018 03:12PM

dan1895 wrote: »

Amazing the amount of people jumping to the defence of the perpatrator.

Which one?

GarIT · 15-03-2018 03:12PM

pilly wrote: »

It's amazing that we don't hear of dead burglars every day. :rolleyes:

Burglars are like mice they won’t come in if they see people and they will flee at the first bit of noise. In most circumstances.

pilly · 15-03-2018 03:15PM

I honestly have never heard such a load of BS in my life, and that's saying something on AH.

It's pure and simple keyboard warriors. There's not one person here that knows what it's like to take another persons life. Let alone for the crime of being in your property.

Honestly lads, get off the X Boxes and back into the real world.

rustynutz · 15-03-2018 03:16PM

Hurray, at long last a judgment in favour of the homeowner and not the burglar. This is a gamechanger that will let a lot of people sleep a little sounder in their beds at night.

15-03-2018 03:20PM

pilly wrote: »

I honestly have never heard such a load of BS in my life, and that's saying something on AH.

It's pure and simple keyboard warriors. There's not one person here that knows what it's like to take another persons life. Let alone for the crime of being in your property.

Honestly lads, get off the X Boxes and back into the real world.

Someone is in your child's bedroom in the middle of the night. What are you going to do? Answer that. Actually answer it instead of just saying 'keyboard warrior' over and over.

Man cleared of murdering trespasser in home with garden shears

Comments