Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
Thats right.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nath
Thats right.
You trying to sympathise with Alan by making things up too?
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by alan-g-w
So how are a judge and jury meant to decide what happened? Jump in the DeLorean and see it for themselves?
I'm by no means an expert in the field, but the outcome of a court case is decided using facts presented, yes? In this case, in this thread and instead of an outcome, my OPINION has been decided by the facts. If you want to seriously believe the guy ran after him and hit him once and left it then, for the umpteenth fucking time, fine. But it makes you sound deluded.
A judge and jury will have the full evidence - what you've done is read/hear a small report and then make up the rest of the story as you think it may of gone down. You may be perfectly right, and Im not saying you're wrong, but at the same time you could be far from the mark.
And the only FACT your opinion has been decided by is a broken bat, after that you've made everything else up.
And I swear you cant read, or at least fail to understand da inglish. I dont know how many times I have to say I dont know what happened, one hit or 20, and I see no FACTS for me to make an informed decision on.
I'm simply discussing a small part of the story, not making the 'rest of the story' up.
The facts as far as I'm aware are that a guy has permanent brain damage after being set about on by at least 2 people, one of whom had a cricket bat. That very bat broke into 3 pieces - be it by the shite quality of it, condition, who knows for sure - certainly not me. But by reading that in a story the first place your mind jumps to is that they've hit him so many times that the bat has not been able to take it. I'd say it's very unlikely that a solid wooden bat broke into 3 pieces with one swing - again, possible, but in my opinion that I'm allowed after looking at the facts that's what I think. I think the majority would agree with me too.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
That and the testimony from the neighbours who witnessed this man and brother batter a man half to death while pleading with them to stop.
|
SVM 286
Member
Registered: 13th Feb 05
Location: pain
User status: Offline
|
It's a case of plain, straight forward bat newbism.
Should have rape taped it first as a reinforcement.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by alan-g-w
I'm simply discussing a small part of the story, not making the 'rest of the story' up.
The facts as far as I'm aware are that a guy has permanent brain damage after being set about on by at least 2 people, one of whom had a cricket bat. That very bat broke into 3 pieces - be it by the shite quality of it, condition, who knows for sure - certainly not me. But by reading that in a story the first place your mind jumps to is that they've hit him so many times that the bat has not been able to take it. I'd say it's very unlikely that a solid wooden bat broke into 3 pieces with one swing - again, possible, but in my opinion that I'm allowed after looking at the facts that's what I think. I think the majority would agree with me too.
Again you're on about making this opinion after looking at the facts - WE HAVE NO FACTS OTHER THAN A BROKEN BAT. That is no where near enough to then say it must of been from more than one hit.
And his injuries (from what we know, we dont have the full report which will obviously be very exact on what happened) could be from on hit or a load also. How many times have you heard of fights where someone had been hit once, fallen and banged his head on the ground and died?! Loads - those sorts of injuries can happen with one hit.
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
What the fuck. They tied up him and his family and he managed to free himself and beat one down and gets charged? It's funny how if he beat him to death and slit the other two's throats, he may have got away with self defense. No proof 
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/4794365.GBH_brothers_told__you_can_t_take_law_into_your_own_hands/
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/4793026.Two_Wycombe_brothers_jailed_in_GBH_case/?ref=mr
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ed
There's self defence and there's chasing someone down and hitting them over the head with a bat so hard it breaks into three pieces.
Yes, one is perfectly acceptable and the other is self defence.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
Complete farce, if you skelp a burglar over the head with a bat you should receive a medal not a jail sentence. It still wouldn't make me think twice about doing it put it that way.
|
CorsAsh
Member
Registered: 19th Apr 02
Location: Munich
User status: Offline
|
Well there's not much chance of the burglar reoffending, hard to get through an open window in a wheelchair.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Have we discussed Salem's previous convictions yet?
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
I heard they made the story up about being tied up and went and smacked an innocent man with a cricket bat.
|
mattk
Member
Registered: 27th Feb 06
Location: St. Helens
User status: Offline
|
rule 1 in self defence is never to strike above the waist line, its near on imposible to cause death or life threatening injury by striking someone with a bat/pole ect below the waist, you only have the right to defend yourself a few blows to the legs and knees to break them would have been enough to suitably incapacitate the intruder and eliminate the threat
on the other hand you could kill them outright and dispose of them properly
I think they should have got reduced sentences on the basis of the circumstances, they deffo shouldnt have just been let off though
[Edited on 15-12-2009 by mattk]
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by mattk
rule 1 in self defence is never to strike above the waist line, its near on imposible to cause death or life threatening injury by striking someone with a bat/pole ect below the waist, you only have the right to defend yourself a few blows to the legs and knees to break them would have been enough to suitably incapacitate the intruder and eliminate the threat
on the other hand you could kill them outright and dispose of them properly
I think they should have got reduced sentences on the basis of the circumstances, they deffo shouldnt have just been let off though
[Edited on 15-12-2009 by mattk]
THey have, 30 months isn't a lot for causing someone brain damage, good behaviour and he would be out in a year.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I'm all for allowing it to be allowed only below the waist, smashed up legs are good enough to stop them doing it again.
|
Marc
Member
Registered: 11th Aug 02
Location: York
User status: Offline
|
Can he claim for a new bat?
|
Colin
Member
Registered: 4th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorsAsh-Sport
if the 'real victim' got let off for giving the robber brain damage it would case all kind of mahem during break in's and people would no doubt end up killing the criminals
Sounds like a solution to 2 problems to me, it would solve crime and prison overcrowding.
A mate of mine used to live in South Africa & was telling me that one night someone broke into their house, I cant recall all the details but the end result was his dad shooting the intruder dead. When the police arrived they thanked him as they had been after this guy for a while, then promptly took an arm and a leg each & dragged the body off & dumped it in the back of their pick-up & that was all they heard. 
|
GF-91
Banned
Registered: 8th Jul 09
Location: Burnley!
User status: Offline
|
Imo : 30 months is nothing for causing brain damage. But, this is a difficult case. The man chased the burglar down the street, which is uneccessary, although adrenaline may have been pumping, and all the intensity took over.
But that brings me to how the burglar didn't just run off, he stayed in the house, and tied the family up and kept them there at knifepoint.
The victim (the man got burgled), should be freed, the encounter would have been traumatic enough. No need for a prison sentence. The victim didn't ask the man to burgle him and tie him up, and hold him at knifepoint.
My thought is that if someone has the cheek to break into your house, tie you up and hold you up at knifepoint, the burglar should accept any treatment they receive, either in the house or just outside the house.
But no, I don't agree that chasing someone up the street with a bat, or a hockey stick, is a normal reaction.
I guess you'd need it to be detailed as to how it all happened and when it happened, before writing how it is okay, or not okay.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
These days if someone wants to rob you it's probably better from a legal point of view to just let them get on with it. 
I suppose it's how the law looks at self defense as well - I don't know the complete law personally but I assume defending yourselves during the incident is considered self defense (i.e. the person(s) hold a knife/gun to you at the time) rather than chasing the burglars after they committed the crime?
I'm not saying I agree with what the judge ruled BTW - just how I interpret the law to be.
|
DaveyLC
Member
Registered: 8th Oct 08
Location: Berkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by GaryF
Liberal chuff
Bring back the gallows I say! 
|
Ojc
Member
Registered: 14th Nov 00
Location: Reading: Drives : Clio 197
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ian
Have we discussed Salem's previous convictions yet?
Go on.
Let me guess.
Benefit fraud? Ringing cars? Robbing old ladies of their pensions?
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by alan-g-w
I'm simply discussing a small part of the story, not making the 'rest of the story' up.
The facts as far as I'm aware are that a guy has permanent brain damage after being set about on by at least 2 people, one of whom had a cricket bat. That very bat broke into 3 pieces - be it by the shite quality of it, condition, who knows for sure - certainly not me. But by reading that in a story the first place your mind jumps to is that they've hit him so many times that the bat has not been able to take it. I'd say it's very unlikely that a solid wooden bat broke into 3 pieces with one swing - again, possible, but in my opinion that I'm allowed after looking at the facts that's what I think. I think the majority would agree with me too.
Again you're on about making this opinion after looking at the facts - WE HAVE NO FACTS OTHER THAN A BROKEN BAT. That is no where near enough to then say it must of been from more than one hit.
And his injuries (from what we know, we dont have the full report which will obviously be very exact on what happened) could be from on hit or a load also. How many times have you heard of fights where someone had been hit once, fallen and banged his head on the ground and died?! Loads - those sorts of injuries can happen with one hit.
From the first link ed posted:
quote:
A neighbour urged them to stop and said Salem would be killed, he said. But they continued “like a pack of animals” and it was “fortuitous” he did not die, Judge Reddihough said.
That fact enough for you? See now, just for the sake of not ageeing with me, you look like a tit. My assumptions seem to be correct, yes?
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ian
Have we discussed Salem's previous convictions yet?
No, since it's nothing to do with whether he deserved to be rattled around the head with a cicket bat in this instance. Who knows, maybe Karma had it in for him - but I'm pretty sure Munir Hussain and the others didn't know any of his previous.
|
