My arrest hell after gang beat son

My arrest hell after gang beat son

www.thesun.co.uk

SHOCKED dad Colin Philpott told last night how he was arrested on suspicion of attempted MURDER after tackling thugs attacking his stepson.

Cleaning firm boss Colin, 57, rushed from his house to the aid of Alex Lee, 25, who had been confronted by up to five teenagers vandalising his dad's van.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I can't believe it when things like this happen...
What is the law there for!?

Should this man have just stood by and watched his son be killed?
I know I wouldn't have gone in against 5 guys with just my bare hands... especially not if I were his age trying to protect my family... IMO a weapon of some sort is fair game!

The law has got it all wrong... he should have been praised, not arrested.

This makes me sick... its no wonder people think they can do whatever they like these days.

www.thesun.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

www.dailymail.co.uk...

[edit on 27/7/09 by axehappy]

EDIT to add a link with more info

[edit on 27/7/09 by axehappy]

[edit] I shamefully admit that I did not read the story. I still wouldn't find the man guilty, but could understand if another juror did [/edit]

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Karlhungis]

Originally posted by axehappy
The law has got it all wrong... he should have been praised, not arrested.

oh ffs, populist sensationalist nonsense. he stabbed a kid five times in the chest, of course he should be arrested. weather or not he was justified to stab the kid is not a decision the police should have any power to make. grow up.

I agree with pieman.

I also agree with Karlhungis.

He had it right when he went to his sons defense. What he did was beyond defense. He stabbed the kid 5 times in the chest.

Personally, I would have done whatever was necessary to get them off my family members.

If that meant stabbing and killing them to make them stop, then so be it.

Where is the line between murder and self defence?

I would class self defence as not just the defence of myself, but also my family.
His son would have out the fight if he was already down and getting kicked.... so it was essentially 5 on 1.
Is he supposed to fight fair in this situation?

My idea of fighting against the odds like this has always been to seriously hurt one nice and quickly. Let the others then decide if they want to risk similar injury to themselves by continuing to attack.

If someone I love were involved, then I would be even more ferocious.

I can't really blame this man for what happened.

Its unfortunate that someone died, but murder!?
He was just defending his property and family surely?

[edit on 27/7/09 by axehappy]

reply to post by axehappy



If there are 5 of them and you have the time to stab a kid in the chest 5 times then chances are it isn't as bad as it was made out to be.

Unless of course he concentrated on one while 4 beat down his son.

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by axehappy

 

If there are 5 of them and you have the time to stab a kid in the chest 5 times then chances are it isn't as bad as it was made out to be.

Unless of course he concentrated on one while 4 beat down his son.

I would imagine he would have ran in and reduced the numbers quickly, as I would also have done. The intention wouldn't have been to kill, I'm sure, but in a situation like that I doubt you'd be thinking too clearly.

I know my only thought would be 'make sure he can no longer fight'.

EDIT: From what he says in the Daily Mail article, they all came at him and he reacted. I can't see how that is attempted murder.

[edit on 27/7/09 by axehappy]

Originally posted by axehappy
I can't really blame this man for what happened.

Its unfortunate that someone died, but murder!?

He was just defending his property and family surely?

so the cops, in your estimation, should be able to turn up at an incident where a teenager has been stabbed 5 times and, after asking what had happened, decide not to arrest the stabber because the kid that was stabbed deserved it?

these were vandals and, according to the sun, it was an ongoing issue. the son in law should have called the cops, not tackled the vandals, the father should have called the cops, not stabbed a kid five times in the chest.

if you pick up a knife and stab someone, you should always have to answer for it, otherwise you could just stab someone every time you felt threatened.

I see where you're coming from pieman, and I agree to an extent.

I don't believe that you should resort to this kind of violence every time you feel threatened, although I totally understand what you mean.

I just feel that as soon as someone attacks you, or someone close to you, they are taking their life in their hands.

You hear so many stories of people being killed after taking only one punch (usually after hitting their head on the floor), its safe to assume that being involved in a fight of any kind is a matter of life and death.

If the gang had seriously hurt his son, then its attempted murder... it was them who attacked, and had the greater numbers.
He hurt one of the gang members, I think the police should be entitled to say it was obviously self defence and leave him with his family rather than arrest him.

I suppose its good that the law is equal, but not good that it means a man has to be treated as a criminal for something like this.


EDIT: The article in the Daily Mail is a bit more detailed, and apparently they had called the cops a few times for previous incidents. I've been in a similar situation before where you get so frustated with the police not actually stopping the criminal activity that you end up getting involved. Sometimes, with unfortunate results, like this case.

[edit on 27/7/09 by axehappy]

You cannot take the law into your own hands. Two wrongs do not make this right.

Those teenagers should be charged also with assault, vandalism etc.

Although the father was trying todefend his son/property. He will stil be charged under the law for using a knife and stabbing someone.

It wil be up for the P/F, to decide weither or not the case should be pursuede, to the courts.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Laurauk]

well, this boys would be in a body bag if ths happened with me ....

Dont weild a blade, strike with a baton/cosh instead...that way any injuries inflicted can be 'explained away' as being the result of breaking up the altercation

[edit on 27-7-2009 by Taikonaut]

If my Son was being attacked and the same circumstances arisen I would have done the same thing as Colin Philpott . Sometimes self defence or the defence of family and/or friends is going to involve serious injury or the attacker being killed out right . The charge of attempted is utterly ridicules I could see the New Zealand legal system failing someone in the same way . The only real way to deal with vandals , home invasions e.t.c is private property rights .

A cop friend of mine told me that if I ever have to shoot someone, keep pulling the trigger until the gun clicks a few times!!

This way, when you are in court, you can say that you panicked, you feared for your life, and you just snapped. You didn't know what happened until someone came and took the gun from you!

It is better to look like a scared victim than a calculated killer!

I don't know if this works for knives, but I don't see why not. Plus, if I thought someone was trying to kill my son, I would want them dead, not just ran off to try another day. Here in Florida, you can use your weapon in defense of life or property for yourself or another, and they just increased the castle doctrine to include your personal space, not just your home.

In other words, you are no longer required to retreat, even if a retreat is available. It is perfectly justifiable to kill someone with your weapon in defense of yourself or another!

The police may have been correct in the arrest, but hopefully the man will be cleared at trial!

reply to post by pieman

if you pick up a knife and stab someone, you should always have to answer for it, otherwise you could just stab someone every time you felt threatened.

Exactly! What is wrong with that? If I feel threatened, I plan to stab/shoot/strike or whatever seems appropriate to preemptively end the threat. I don't plan to get injured before I defend myself!!

When it is understood that a threat constitutes a real reason for action, then the threats tend to be few and far between. I have ran people off by the simple action of squaring my shoulders, facing them head on and asking, "Are you sure?" I know it sounds like a movie cliche, but it is a great way to seperate the real threats from the punks that are just talking. Thugs typically talk a lot of smack as they are leaving, but they don't stick around to see why I am so confident and willing to face them.

An inner city kid from New Orleans, that I used to know, gave me some great advice once. We had a lot of little wannabe gangsters in our town, and they were just talkers. He said if you ever disrespect a "real" gangsta, you will never know. They won't say a word. They will catch you outside and jump you. He said if I feel threatened, mimic the real deal, not the wannabes. Give them a sly nod and move on. Make them wonder. Put the fear in their mind instead of vice versa. If they are the real deal, they will appreciate the acknowledgement and they may respect you. If they are the wannabes, they will either get scared, or they will keep talking. Either way, you have seperated the wheat from the chaff!

I agree with the advice posted above.

I grew up in a pretty rough area of the UK, and the idea was always to not look like a target.

Walk confidently, square shoulders, head up ... most of the time, people wouldn't bother me. (Plus, I'm a pretty big guy, which helps).

On occasion when I was bothered by someone, I usually managed to solve it by either completely ignoring them or, if they got in my face, just moving them out of my way. Not violently, just putting my arm across them and moving them aside... then just kept walking.
I got in a few fights, but usually they'd just shout abuse as I was walking away.

I'd be a bit more scared now though, cos there's a lot of shootings in that area lately... glad I moved away... I try to avoid violence and confrontation whenever possible.

In the US only about 80-100 years ago this would not have been an issue whatsoever. Men wore their guns on their side and protected themselves and their families. The only people who were prosecuted were the ones who shot people unprovoked or in robbery etc. You could even shoot someone for horse stealing, which was a little too much.

Now, the criminal has MORE rights than the law abiding citizen. People have had it up to their eyeballs with thugs and punks.

He shouldn't even go to trial imo, but if he does he should claim temp insanity and be acquitted.

This is unbelievable. A guy protects his family and gets charged with murder. Anyone who has kids or loved ones and sees them outnumbered and in danger would've done the same. I know that 5 stabs sound a little overboard but that's what happens when a man is enraged. I know when I was provoked once I couldn't control myself and beat the crap out of the guy and later couldn't remember much. It was like my eyes were blacked out and I kept hitting the guy. He insulted my heritage out of nowhere and for no reason. I can't even immagine what I would do if someone was attacking my daughter/brother/parents.

5 against one is a weapon. Both physical and mentally. 5 teens at the age of 16 to 25 is a very dangerous weapon against one person.

The society to day has become such that you have to use great force to break a aggression done by teens. And even more force if they are working as a team. 5 against one is a team effort. It becomes a weapon against one. His father did the right thing and brought the right tools for the job. The sad thing is that someone got stabbed because the father was scared doing his rescue. But who has the skills to deal with 5 aggressive teens working together without a weapon?





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]