INTENSITY²
Politics, Mature and taboo => Political Pundits => Topic started by: Peter on August 21, 2007, 07:14:27 AM
-
I hate this country; it's full of stupid, violent people who make me long for a good genocidal purge. If that wasn't bad enough, we can't even defend ourselves or each other from them without getting arrested for it. How would you respond if you saw some ape beating up an old woman on the bus? Would you crack his skull open on the handrail and spend the next 5 years in prison? Tell him to stop and risk being attacked yourself, knowing that it's highly unlikely that anyone else would come to your aid, and knowing that several people have died in recent years from intervening in similar situations? Would you call the police on your mobile and hope the woman survives the attack? Or would you do nothing?
Is assault lawful when protecting someone?
WHO, WHAT, WHY?
The Magazine answers...
Assault is against the law but what if it is committed to protect someone else?
Protecting the vulnerable is considered a key tenet of a civilised society, but recent events have shown that intervention in an effort to uphold community values can come at a very high price.
As well as the recent high-profile cases of men being killed after stepping in to stop troublemakers, there is also the memory of Philip Lawrence, the headmaster who was fatally stabbed in 1995 when trying to save a pupil from a gang.
The dilemma of intervention is one many of us - including broadcaster Jeremy Vine - have grappled with in our minds, if not in reality. But what protection does the law afford the person who commits violence when protecting someone else?
THE ANSWER
Assault is lawful if preventing a crime or protecting family, property and friends
But force must be reasonable and proportionate
In England and Wales, an assault is usually deemed unlawful unless in self-defence.
"There's the concept of self-defence in case law that extends to defending not just one's self and one's property but also one's nearest and dearest and family," says solicitor Robert Brown.
"If I was married and my wife was being attacked then it would be a form of self-defence by analogy to protect property or family. So to that extent there would be some permission."
WHO, WHAT, WHY?
A regular part of the BBC News Magazine, Who, What, Why? aims to answer some of the questions behind the headlines
Self-defence would extend to a student, in the case of a teacher, but not to a stranger, although it would be interesting to see how the law develops given recent events, Mr Brown adds.
But there is another way to argue that an assault committed to protect a stranger was lawful.
The Criminal Law Act is aimed at preventing a crime and permits assault if, for example, a shoplifter is being stopped from leaving a store.
"Therefore by analogy if you see someone beating up a stranger and intervene and you are accused of assault then you could use the Criminal Law Act to say 'I've a defence because I've prevented a crime,'" says Mr Brown.
"Therefore there's a rather broad defence in law to protect someone who intervenes."
The force used must be "reasonable and proportionate" and that is decided by a jury, which should take into account the difficulty of assessing what this means in the heat of the moment.
In Scotland, the self-defence law is slightly broader and covers acting on behalf of anyone else, says Alasdair Thomson of the Glasgow Law Practice.
"You can act in self-defence of another in Scots law and you can come to the assistance of a person under threat of imminent physical violence," he says.
"But the response has to be proportionate to the violence that's potentially being meted out. It's not classed as an assault because there's no intent to injure."
Much as I would want to help out another person who was being attacked or abused, these situations can quickly escalate into violence
John, London
But the advice from police is unequivocally against intervention. A spokeswoman for the Association of Chief Police Officers says they have only one instruction - call the police.
And a Home Office statement said: "The public should not intervene in any situations of any criminal activity. They may put themselves in danger, exacerbate the situation and ultimately be acting on the wrong side of the law."
Those who have stepped in have sometimes found the authorities interpret events in an unsympathetic way.
A rail guard who intervened to protect passengers from a man who had allegedly threatened them has reportedly been sacked and charged with threatening behaviour, after appearing to head-butt the man.
Lottery
And in a separate incident, Magazine reader John, from London, says he was charged with grievous bodily harm after a teenager who had been abusing a woman in a petrol station then squared up to him and threatened to knock him out. John punched the youth and fractured his jaw.
He was charged with GBH, suspended from work, depicted as a thug by lawyers and faced the prospect of jail, but the charge was dropped when CCTV evidence clearly showed the youth, who was eventually convicted of affray, behaving threateningly.
"Much as I would want to help out another person who was being attacked or abused, these situations can quickly escalate into violence," says John.
"And even if you don't get hurt as a result, the police are going to get involved, as are lawyers who are smart enough to make the whole thing a lottery."
Rail guard bravely defends commuters from a violent yob - and gets sacked for it
Last updated at 11:19am on 21st August 2007
Comments Comments (3)
Sacked: Rail guard Paul Yarwood has been forced to put his house up for sale after being sacked for tackling a violent fare dodger
Most popular stories
* News »
* Entire site »
* 'My shame at watching Tube thug beat passenger' admits Jeremy Vine
* Executive who branded wife with iron freed with a £2,000 fine
* Widow of headteacher killed by 'human rights' thug: 'I can't survive this'
* Madeleine's parents meet with Ken Bigley's brother to discuss abduction agony
* £40m waste of the 'Mickey Mouse' degrees
More detailed results »
* News »
* Entire site »
* Middle-age spread? It isn't just a big fat joke
* BBC children's TV hosts 'are either gay or childless... and they don't like kids', claims children's presenter
* Is Rhys Ifans Sienna's new actor fellow?
* 'My shame at watching Tube thug beat passenger' admits Jeremy Vine
* Executive who branded wife with iron freed with a £2,000 fine
More detailed results »
Email newsletter
Get the Mail Online email delivered to your inbox
Headlines
* Freed AGAIN: Drug charges against Pete Doherty dropped due to police blunder
* Victory against Royal Mail in the fight to send frontline troops free parcels
* Widow of headteacher killed by 'human rights' thug: 'I can't survive this'
* Number of failed asylum seekers kicked out of Britain falls by 30 per cent
* Madeleine: Burglar was on loose at Portuguese holiday complex
* British teacher buried in bath of sand had been tortured for hours by sadistic killer
* Executive who branded wife with iron freed with a £2,000 fine
* Tories woo voters with plans for three year paid paternity leave and extra bank holidays
* Killer Hurricane Dean downgraded to Category Three - for now - as it slices through Mexico
* Cigarette sales fall by seven per cent following smoking ban
* Health and safety chiefs: Bus-stop bench must face a hedge - so pensioners won't fall into road
* Two-month-old baby killed in pushchair after car mounts pavement
* Weather forecasters' verdict on Britain's soggy summer: August is SUNNIER than usual
* 'Mickey Mouse' university degrees costing taxpayers £40million a year
* Is fat catching? Scientists discover the cold virus that makes you obese
* Hedge fund tycoon abandoned his £80,000 supercar in a pound - because he was 'too busy' to collect it
* MORE NEWS
A rail guard has been fired for defending commuters from a violent fare dodger.
Paul Yarwood, 44, came to the rescue after a drunken passenger abused travellers and threatened staff with a broom at Colchester station.
But bosses at rail company One Railway sacked him for gross misconduct, claiming CCTV showed him headbutting the man.
His dismissal comes despite an admission by the fare dodger that he was entirely to blame.
The father-of-three, who has not worked since the incident, will appear before a court on Thursday accused of threatening behaviour.
Today his wife, Maria, 41, said the family have been forced to put their house up for sale after being unable to pay the mortgage.
She told the Daily Mirror: "Our lives have been ruined by this and it has been hanging over our heads for months. Paul was just doing his job and helping to protect his passengers.
"It's a farce. He's shattered by this. He didn't attack this man, even though he could have claimed it was self-defence.
"The company say he should have kept his cool, but he did. It's not they who have to deal face-to-face with situations like this and put up with what staff have to."
Mrs Yarwood said her husband - a former soldier who had notched up seven years of exemplary service with One Railway - had refused to stand by when a drunken passenger threatened members of the public at the Essex station.
The man had jumped over a ticket barrier, abused station staff and illegally lit up a cigarette on a waiting train.
When a supervisor tried to persuade him to leave, he grabbed him, threatened to hit another member of staff with a broom and told a fellow traveller he would punch him. After escorting passengers to safety, Mr Yarwood confronted the man, who lunged at him and knocked him to the ground.
Onlookers described how his attacker "loomed" over Mr Yarwood as he tried to get up and how their heads had briefly touched.
One Railway sacked Mr Yarwood after claiming that six seconds of CCTV showed him headbutting the man.
Police later questioned and charged Mr Yarwood while the man was fined £80 for smoking.
Mrs Yarwood said: "They're basing their case on six seconds of CCTV while there are plenty of witnesses to tell them what did happen."
The RMT union has held two local strikes over the incident, with the support of members of the public.
Derek Monnery, head of the Essex Rail Users' Federation passenger group, said: "Managers have to ask why this strike was so strongly backed. They should have taken into account the support given to Mr Yarwood by co-workers when they took the decision to sack him."
According to a union insider, the fare dodger returned to the station shortly after the incident and admitted he was at fault.
The source said: "He gave a taped interview to the station manager in which he admitted being abusive and threatening. He made it clear he felt he was to blame for the entire incident and did not feel any action should be taken against the guard."
Bosses at One Railway have defended the sacking, claiming they have "comprehensively" addressed the RMT union's concerns
-
catchy title...is interested.
long assed post.....can't be assed.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x97VLJBFWuo
This should lighten you up a little. :)
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
:laugh:
Ive got another video that someone did, its a mock chav hunt:
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashViewType=Personal&FlashBoxId=568349423
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
:laugh:
Ive got another video that someone did, its a mock chav hunt:
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashViewType=Personal&FlashBoxId=568349423
That video was reported on the Daily Star last week.
Wouldn't know sense of humour if it bit them in the... ARGGG! - Trode
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
:laugh:
Ive got another video that someone did, its a mock chav hunt:
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashViewType=Personal&FlashBoxId=568349423
That video was reported on the Daily Star last week.
Wouldn't know sense of humour if it bit them in the... ARGGG! - Trode
My brother "reads" the Star I believe. The video was supposed to be banned or something.
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
:laugh:
Ive got another video that someone did, its a mock chav hunt:
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashViewType=Personal&FlashBoxId=568349423
That video was reported on the Daily Star last week.
Wouldn't know sense of humour if it bit them in the... ARGGG! - Trode
My brother "reads" the Star I believe. The video was supposed to be banned or something.
Do you know who Trode is? Dragon Quest much?
-
he got poned!
the happy slapper looked just like eamonn.
:laugh:
Ive got another video that someone did, its a mock chav hunt:
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashViewType=Personal&FlashBoxId=568349423
That video was reported on the Daily Star last week.
Wouldn't know sense of humour if it bit them in the... ARGGG! - Trode
My brother "reads" the Star I believe. The video was supposed to be banned or something.
Do you know who Trode is? Dragon Quest much?
No idea at all, i didnt watch it. I thought it was a snipe at the real cals Iltrode thing.
-
It's a video game, actually.
-
It's a video game, actually.
I lose track, I dont play enough of a selection.
-
You can respond with equal force here. Completely fine to defend yourself as well. If there is an immediate threat of death you can even kill someone in self defense. If I saw someone beating an old lady I would intervene. I have done it before in the past with people fighting. Gets me a bloody nose at the worst. That is no big deal.
-
You can respond with equal force here. Completely fine to defend yourself as well. If there is an immediate threat of death you can even kill someone in self defense. If I saw someone beating an old lady I would intervene. I have done it before in the past with people fighting. Gets me a bloody nose at the worst. That is no big deal.
I'm pretty sure it's the same here. If they are in your house you can shoot them but not if they are just on your property, better if you drag them into you house before calling them and make sure they are dead. On the street only supposed to use enough force to get away. In either case get ready for a law suit even though they started it which won't get you jail time but will ruin you financially.
-
If I saw someone beating an old lady I would intervene.
I would do the same. Seeing that sort of thing would make me so angry.
-
do brits rol their R-rrr's/
as in the word: rrrrrunner
-
nnnnnnnnnnnnno.
-
nnnnnnnnnnnnno.
Dunc hates rrrrrrrrruning.
-
do brits rol their R-rrr's/
as in the word: rrrrrunner
The posh Tory wankers do.
-
Less little shits to cause trouble now:
Five boys between the age of 12 and 14 are found guilty of stoning a father to death as he played cricket with his son.
Today the five burst into tears as they were found guilty of manslaughter.
Ernest Norton was at a leisure centre in Kent with his wife and son in February last year when he and his son were surrounded by a group of youngsters.
When Mr Norton tried to scare them off he was attacked with stones - and died of a heart attack at the scene. The five boys clung to their parents as the guilty verdict was read out.
Ernest Norton and his son played a game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
This was a case where there were no winners, say the police. Ernest Norton, a loving father of two, was killed in a random and pointless attack by five children, the oldest of whom was 12.
Mr Norton died on an innocuous-looking tennis court in Erith, south London. He and his son were playing a makeshift game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
The pair were verbally abused and spat on. A piece of wood and stones were thrown at them - one stone, according to a young witness, was the size of half a brick.
Mr Norton was struck twice, suffered a heart attack and died.
James Norton, then 17, said he and his father were trapped. It was a shocking, frightening assault.
Police hope the trial will send a powerful message: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
Locals say parts of Erith can be dangerous at times. One taxi driver talked of groups of kids hanging around the town centre with nothing to do, causing trouble.
The police hope this trial will send a powerful message to children on the fringes of gangs like the one Mr Norton's killers belonged to: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
As the verdicts were read out, the children and their parents in the dock began to cry. The youngest boy, 10 at the time of the attack, 12 now, was the first to hear his guilt. Several jurors were weeping, as was Mr Norton's widow. The boys are still on bail and will be sentenced in October.
The judge told the defendants that despite their youth, custody is inevitable.
-
Poor babies crying at the verdict. I am sure they will get far less then man would have if he had hurt one of them in defense their parents would have wanted him in for life
-
exterminate the motherless fucks
-
It's disgraceful. People should be allowed to protect themselves and others from crimes without fear of prosecution. If anything, the worthless scum who was abusing the woman should be beaten for being such a cheeky twat.
-
Less little shits to cause trouble now:
Five boys between the age of 12 and 14 are found guilty of stoning a father to death as he played cricket with his son.
Today the five burst into tears as they were found guilty of manslaughter.
Ernest Norton was at a leisure centre in Kent with his wife and son in February last year when he and his son were surrounded by a group of youngsters.
When Mr Norton tried to scare them off he was attacked with stones - and died of a heart attack at the scene. The five boys clung to their parents as the guilty verdict was read out.
Ernest Norton and his son played a game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
This was a case where there were no winners, say the police. Ernest Norton, a loving father of two, was killed in a random and pointless attack by five children, the oldest of whom was 12.
Mr Norton died on an innocuous-looking tennis court in Erith, south London. He and his son were playing a makeshift game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
The pair were verbally abused and spat on. A piece of wood and stones were thrown at them - one stone, according to a young witness, was the size of half a brick.
Mr Norton was struck twice, suffered a heart attack and died.
James Norton, then 17, said he and his father were trapped. It was a shocking, frightening assault.
Police hope the trial will send a powerful message: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
Locals say parts of Erith can be dangerous at times. One taxi driver talked of groups of kids hanging around the town centre with nothing to do, causing trouble.
The police hope this trial will send a powerful message to children on the fringes of gangs like the one Mr Norton's killers belonged to: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
As the verdicts were read out, the children and their parents in the dock began to cry. The youngest boy, 10 at the time of the attack, 12 now, was the first to hear his guilt. Several jurors were weeping, as was Mr Norton's widow. The boys are still on bail and will be sentenced in October.
The judge told the defendants that despite their youth, custody is inevitable.
Let me guess, the kids were all muslims, amIrite??
-
Less little shits to cause trouble now:
Five boys between the age of 12 and 14 are found guilty of stoning a father to death as he played cricket with his son.
Today the five burst into tears as they were found guilty of manslaughter.
Ernest Norton was at a leisure centre in Kent with his wife and son in February last year when he and his son were surrounded by a group of youngsters.
When Mr Norton tried to scare them off he was attacked with stones - and died of a heart attack at the scene. The five boys clung to their parents as the guilty verdict was read out.
Ernest Norton and his son played a game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
This was a case where there were no winners, say the police. Ernest Norton, a loving father of two, was killed in a random and pointless attack by five children, the oldest of whom was 12.
Mr Norton died on an innocuous-looking tennis court in Erith, south London. He and his son were playing a makeshift game of cricket, surrounded by a gang of up to 20 mainly hooded children.
The pair were verbally abused and spat on. A piece of wood and stones were thrown at them - one stone, according to a young witness, was the size of half a brick.
Mr Norton was struck twice, suffered a heart attack and died.
James Norton, then 17, said he and his father were trapped. It was a shocking, frightening assault.
Police hope the trial will send a powerful message: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
Locals say parts of Erith can be dangerous at times. One taxi driver talked of groups of kids hanging around the town centre with nothing to do, causing trouble.
The police hope this trial will send a powerful message to children on the fringes of gangs like the one Mr Norton's killers belonged to: anti-social behaviour can kill, and convictions will follow.
As the verdicts were read out, the children and their parents in the dock began to cry. The youngest boy, 10 at the time of the attack, 12 now, was the first to hear his guilt. Several jurors were weeping, as was Mr Norton's widow. The boys are still on bail and will be sentenced in October.
The judge told the defendants that despite their youth, custody is inevitable.
Let me guess, the kids were all muslims, amIrite??
I don't think so if they had been they would not have used the term 'antisocial' it would have been deemed insensitive :M