It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Macenroe82
As the title says, a man in Canada was sent to jail for defending himself against a home intruder.
A scum bag broke into a mans home while he was asleep.
The criminal took a knife and stab the sleeping man in the head and tried to flee.
Well our snoozed our hero wasn’t taking that lying down - pardon the pun.
He chased the low life into the hall, disarmed him and gave him a taste of his own medicine.
The perp died from one of the stab wounds, our hero sent to the hospital and later detained by LEO.
The crown wanted Our hero to be sentenced to 8 years in prison the lawyer shot back with 3 years, less the time already served. The judge gave him 5.
He has about 2 and a half years left for his sentence.
It’s times like this that it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Canada’s criminal law system is an embarrassment.
Sentences like this are more common place here.
Criminals have more rights than victims.
Recently a scum bag in my home town spent 4 years in jail out of his sentenced 12. But because he was put in segregation our libtard judge released him into society.
2 weeks later he raped a girl at knife point, was arrested, released back on bail, and the other night he committed a home invasion and beat a dude down with another perp.
The citizens of my town are becoming used to this nonsense, revolving door, joke of a system.
So much so that people are talking about patrolling the streets at night handing out Vigilante justice.
Here is the article of the man thrown in jail for defending himself.
Man sent to prison for self defence
Here is the murder rapist intruder article
NYS Penal Law, Article 35, Section 15, paragraph 2:
A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;
A person in possession or control of any premises, or a person licensed or privileged to be thereon or therein, …may use deadly physical force in order to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of arson (as defined in Article 150), or
A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such burglary (as defined in article 140).
Court was told a considerable amount of Pratt's blood was found in his bedroom following the attack, partially corroborating his version of events in that he was acting in self-defence.
"Logic suggests that when there is an intruder in the house that it would make good sense to ascertain the identity of the intruder and ensure that he be expelled from the house," Cummings said in his decision.