Should this man be charged with murder?

originally posted by: PhoenixFreeman
a reply to: VoidHawk

Thats a really good point you've made there...

Luckily for the father it doesn't appear to be the case, but if it had been the father would be seriously in the poo!

I'm often getting flamed in threads similar to this for saying "We dont know all the facts" while everyone else is baying for blood, but the truth is, we really dont!

originally posted by: VoidHawk
I'm often getting flamed in threads similar to this for saying "We dont know all the facts" while everyone else is baying for blood, but the truth is, we really dont!

Because people read a few articles which give second hand opinions on the matter & take it as gospel.

This is fresh news, unless you were there then right now everything is speculation.

The man deserves a medal for getting rid of this scum. The dude would have only continued to torment innocent victims and probably would have killed someone as well. I don't like to see anyone's life taken but in this circumstance I believe it was justified.

a reply to: PhoenixFreeman

No. It wasnt murder. At the very least it was 2nd degree manslaughter and by self defense. So, no. Thats not how it works.

I feel like this is foreign justice. In Merica someone stabs you in the eye that is attempted murder. I feel like his fear drove him to do this, forget that he kept stabbing, because the guy just tried to kill him. any jury could surmise that 1 stab might not be enough stop to an armed individual. and thats all that happened. he stopped him. I guess now I have to read the article again to see how many stabs. LOL all over an iphone.

a reply to: PhoenixFreeman

G,day mate
ok a lot of replies saying should have called the cops
lets see now
i could tongue in cheek say heck no this is no siituation to be involving children in. ---- but i won't
i will offer an observation
aussie coppers. BANG. halt or i will fire again
yank coppers. prob shoot the caller
pommy coppers normally no bang stick. you would prob get some good logic and diffused situation
have met three ex bobbies. all now in south aussie cop force
two were ex troopies and went to the south atlantic war games very level headed blokes. good blokes
the third one. i asked. you any good with that pistol mate
reply oh no i wear it because i have too. i dont take it out of its holster, i have never trained with it and i dont like guns
so i looked at him and replied good thing one of us knows how to use it then
that attitude can get a bloke zapped
would like to think the first two kinds of bobbies would have been able to sort the situ out
but i figure the father will do time

No way the bad guy struck first the dad was just bad ass enough to end it.

a reply to: PhoenixFreeman

I don't think the father should have pursued the thug. Just not worth it for a cellphone. Had the mugger injured the son, then I could see dad going off the deep end; I might do the same if I knew the crook was still nearby. That's where the questionable behavior lies in my opinion, not with what came after. The self defense angle seems to be valid in this case, but of course the law in such matters is never black and white and all sorts of conditions must be met for use as acceptable legal defense. As for a self defense killing with a knife? From my experience (in America) it's treated somewhat differently than justified homicide with a firearm. Seems (and it's just a personal theory) that the courts see such as somehow more savage or aggravated.

We don't really know what happened - we weren't there.

Sounds a bit dodgy...the father, apparently armed with a knife, hunted the guy down...sounds like a vigilante attack.

The victim stabbed the father in the eye, but was THAT in self defense?

It's not clear.

a reply to: PhoenixFreeman

Hell, no! I can't believe charges were even filed! Anyone who commits a crime and is in the possession of a weapon is taking a risk of losing their own life. This robber stabbed the father in the eye and they still filed murder charges! Unbelievable!!! I've always said that criminals have more rights than there victims, and this is a perfect example of a system that's clearly flawed.

Based on what little factual information is available, yes he should face murder or manslaughter charges.

Firstly, under UK law it is an offence to carry a weapon or tool with a flixed blade outside of your own property unless:
* You can demonstrate you are transporting it from a place of sale, to your home/storage.
* You can demonstrate you are transporting it from your home/storage to a place of sale.
* You can demonstrate you are transporting it from home/storage to a workplace where it will be used in the course of your employment.
* You can demonstrate you are transporting it from home/storage to a place of training (martial arts weapons).
And that during transport, the item must be kept secure, in such a way that it is not easy to unsecure the item and use it as a weapon.

He was carrying a kitchen knife because he feared for his own safety. From the linked article:

He retaliated and repeatedly stabbed Bradley with a knife he had taken from home because he feared for his safety.

That is in direct contravention of UK statute law. The law does not allow the carriage of weapons for self defence under any circumstances, military and police excepted. So at the very least, he would get possession of an offensive weapon. If the attacker had not died as a result, he would get actual bodily harm with an offensive weapon.

The UK does allow you to use "reasonable force" in the course of self defence. What is considered to be "reasonable force" is judged on a case-by-case basis by the court, not by the police. The police have to arrest you regardless, as its not their job to make that determination. Generally, if someones swinging punches at you, and you grab a nearby tree branch and club them unconscious with it, thats not reasonable force, as you were armed and them not. Its a huge grey area, and really does need redefining, but its what we have to work with at the moment.

If you were carrying the item specifically for self defence, then its never considered 'reasonable force', because you are seen to be out looking for trouble. I was always taught, for this reason, to carry a rolled up newspaper. It hurts like fek when hit with it, but you can argue you were just carrying reading matter.

As to the incident itself, if he had stabbed the guy during the initial altercation, then I would side with him, that it was self defence, albeit with an illegally carried weapon.

The fact that the attack was over, and he then CONFRONTED the attacker, he became the aggressor, and it was no longer self defence. Sorry.