Planetarion Forums

Forest · 13 Jun 2003, 16:15

I dont normally post here, but I ahve read something that has wound me up so much.

Tony Martin sh0t a burglar who broke into his home. He si a farmer, and was jailed for it.

Now it appears, the judge has agreed that the burglars, have rights to sue the farmer.

WTF?

How can this ****ty little country called England let ppl get away with this.

He is sueing in the grounds that it has affected his sex life. He also states that he was depressed so couldn't gat a job, and so had top resort to sellings drugs.

Bull****.

So now guys, if someone breaks into your home, u better ask him if u can make him a cuppa tea, cause u really wouldnt wanna hurt their feelings.

FS.

mockingbird · 13 Jun 2003, 16:19

yeah, that's how it works here in the netherlands aswell..

the best thing u can do when u c a burglar forest, is:

RUN !! RUN FOREST!!!!

Minty · 13 Jun 2003, 16:20

I see your point

But what I am more concerned about is how often you failed to keep an alliance running

Code:

Ex-RB Leader
Ex-TRT Leader
Ex-Instinct Leader

ChubbyChecker · 13 Jun 2003, 16:21

Shooting someone and trying to nick their posessions are two different things.

Where do you think we are, America?

Minty · 13 Jun 2003, 16:23

Quote:

Originally posted by mockingbird
yeah, that's how it works here in the netherlands aswell..

the best thing u can do when u c a burglar forest, is:

RUN !! RUN FOREST!!!!

I think you'll find its

RUN FOREST!!! RUN!!!!

Vaio · 13 Jun 2003, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Forest

Stuff

And thats the reason why my country is disappointing me.

Too many criminals are getting away with portraying themselves as 'victims of society' or 'broken homes' instead of sticking their hands up and saying 'we are skum' and we deserve punishment

Perhaps the arab justice system could be adapted slightly for use in the UK. Might be useful to see that the paedos are the ones with their testicles nailed to their foreheads

Vaio

Vaio · 13 Jun 2003, 16:41

and free Tony Martin fs

Vaio

Eeyore · 13 Jun 2003, 16:43

This is a true story: In Finland a burglar once sued the owner of a house he was burglering due to the fact that one of the planks in the staircase was loose and the burgler fell and broke his leg!
he won... which I think is wrong!!!

Deffeh · 13 Jun 2003, 16:47

cant believe they are being allowed to sue, but tony martin deserves his jail sentence.

inf · 13 Jun 2003, 16:59

american compensation happy culture.

Not_RIT · 13 Jun 2003, 17:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Forest
I dont normally post here, but I ahve read something that has wound me up so much.

Tony Martin sh0t a burglar who broke into his home. He si a farmer, and was jailed for it.

Now it appears, the judge has agreed that the burglars, have rights to sue the farmer.

WTF?

How can this ****ty little country called England let ppl get away with this.

He is sueing in the grounds that it has affected his sex life. He also states that he was depressed so couldn't gat a job, and so had top resort to sellings drugs.

Bull****.

So now guys, if someone breaks into your home, u better ask him if u can make him a cuppa tea, cause u really wouldnt wanna hurt their feelings.

FS.

I think the problem lies in the simple fact the farmer shot the burgler running away, as such it wasnt for protection. And I would have thought that sueing the farmer would come under 'proffiting from a crime' which isnt allowed afaik.

Black Dog · 13 Jun 2003, 17:21

Read the case.

Tony Martin had a gap in the stairway of his home that he couldn't have crossed in the dark without intending to confront the burglars, the fact that he carried a loaded shotgun and shot someone in the back is a bit of a 'no-no'. Indeed he had threatened to do so, having been burgled before.

See not_RIT's post for a description of estoppel.

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 17:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Deffeh
cant believe they are being allowed to sue, but tony martin deserves his jail sentence.

for once i disagree with you deffeh, yes, the burglar was running away when he was shot, but, if you (or me) had been through the kind of crap that tony martin took (repeated breakins etc) then i firmly believe that i - at least - would have pulled the trigger. I am also of the firm belief that if he hadnt had that gun with him at that time, he would probably have ended up in hospital, if not dead, from the beating etc that the burglars would have given him

Free Tony Martin fs

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Black Dog
Tony Martin had a gap in the stairway of his home that he couldn't have crossed in the dark without intending to confront the burglars, the fact that he carried a loaded shotgun and shot someone in the back is a bit of a 'no-no'. Indeed he had threatened to do so, having been burgled before.

Was there any lighting, so that he could be aware whether the intruder was facing him, or had his back turned? If not, why is anything that you said even remotely relevant?

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 17:38

to be fair nod, the guy was actually running away from him when he shot him :/
he still ****ing deserved it though

Deffeh · 13 Jun 2003, 17:40

Quote:

Originally posted by roadrunner_0
for once i disagree with you deffeh, yes, the burglar was running away when he was shot, but, if you (or me) had been through the kind of crap that tony martin took (repeated breakins etc) then i firmly believe that i - at least - would have pulled the trigger. I am also of the firm belief that if he hadnt had that gun with him at that time, he would probably have ended up in hospital, if not dead, from the beating etc that the burglars would have given him

Free Tony Martin fs

imho you dont shoot someone in the back. If hes allowed to own a loaded shotgun (which i disagree with, but is another point) then hes obviously familiar with how a gun works, and where to shoot someone. He could have waved it at them or shot at their feet etc.

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 17:56

Its his own god-damned fault for shooting a guy that's running away. He deserves whatever sentence he gets.
I mean, he could have called the cops. Or shot the guy if he threatend him, or attacked him. But shooting a running criminal is just bad.

Oh, and crime is often a fault of society, not broken homes. The criminals are the ones that do the crimes, but why do they do them? That's the big question in crime prevention.

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 17:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Deffeh
imho you dont shoot someone in the back. If hes allowed to own a loaded shotgun (which i disagree with, but is another point) then hes obviously familiar with how a gun works, and where to shoot someone. He could have waved it at them or shot at their feet etc.

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Was there any lighting, so that he could be aware whether the intruder was facing him, or had his back turned? If not, why is anything that you said even remotely relevant?

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 17:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx
Its his own god-damned fault for shooting a guy that's running away. He deserves whatever sentence he gets.
I mean, he could have called the cops. Or shot the guy if he threatend him, or attacked him. But shooting a running criminal is just bad.

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Was there any lighting, so that he could be aware whether the intruder was facing him, or had his back turned? If not, why is anything that you said even remotely relevant?

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 17:58

Clever Nodrog.
I've not heard of this incident before this thread, but from the contents in this thread, i assumed that he was running away and then was shot. If youre running away, that's pretty obvious, no matter the lightning.

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:01

I'm going to save myself the effort of copy/pasting that quote a few more times by pointing out there was in fact no lighting other than that provided by the torch the second intruder shone in his eye the instant before he fired.

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 18:03

It is still relevant, beacause even thought you get light flashed in your face, you can still see if a person is running or not. I've been in situations where i've got flashlight's in my face when its dark, and belive me, you still see what way a person is running.

And even thought the did not see it, it does not excuse shooting a guy that's not threatning/attacking you.

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx
It is still relevant, beacause even thought you get light flashed in your face, you can still see if a person is running or not.

No, you cant.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

And even thought the did not see it, it does not excuse shooting a guy that's not threatning/attacking you.

He was threatening him.

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 18:05

you really need to read a summary of the whole thing before you comment on it to be fair :/
but, from what i remember, the guy had been burgled before, and had been attacked in his home as well (correct me if i am wrong but i dont think i am) also, he lived in a fairly remote farmhouse so the police simply couldnt get there in time to do any good.
He had taken to carrying the loaded shotgun because he lived in fear - in his own home - a state that no one should have to put up with.

When he realised that someone was in his house and went to investigate, it was dark, and he didnt know if they were running towoard or away from him, also, he didnt know if they had weapons - it later was found that they did - and so took the steps to protect himself.
now, i fully agree that he shouldnt have shot the burglar had he any other choice but, to my mind, he didnt.
as i have also said, if he hadnt been carrying that shotgun, what are the odds of the newspaper headlines having said 'farmer killed in botched robbery' instead :/

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 18:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
No, you cant.

He was threatening him.

I can. Since i can, i assume that he can too, if he's not sick in any way.

How can a man that is running away threaten somebody? If somebody is running away from me while screaming "im gonna kill you", im just gonna laugh.

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx
I can. Since i can, i assume that he can too, if he's not sick in any way.

Has your life been on the line in any of these situations? Because you know, that kind of makes your instincts a bit different.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

How can a man that is running away threaten somebody? If somebody is running away from me while screaming "im gonna kill you", im just gonna laugh.

If breaking into someones house at 3am does not constitute a 'threat' to them, we might as well remove that word from the dictionary as it has ceased to have a rational meaning.

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 18:08

snurx, readmy post plz, trust me, the guy was being threatened :/
and living in fear.

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 18:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Has your life been on the line in any of these situations? Because you know, that kind of makes your instincts a bit different.
If breaking into someones house at 3am does not constitute a 'threat' to them, we might as well remove that word from the dictionary as it has ceased to have a rational meaning.

I've been in situations like that when i thought (at the time) that my life might be in danger, but afterwards, it has shown itself that it was not. So i guess its yes. That time, however, i was heavily influenced by various substances, so that all my preceptions was modifed greatly, both postitively and negativily. I mangaed to see a cop that was running towards me, and a guy that was running away from me. (the cop was flashing a maglite in my face, about 7-8 meters away from me)

His property was threatened, not his person. Property has not the same value as human life, no matter what. Did they attack him, or point guns at him? Did they scream that they were going to kill him, or molest him? Did they draw down their pants as a indignation that they were going to give him a jolly good time of suprise sex?

(roadrunner, next post please)

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx
His property was threatened, not his person. Property has not the same value as human life, no matter what. Did they attack him, or point guns at him? Did they scream that they were going to kill him, or molest him? Did they draw down their pants as a indignation that they were going to give him a jolly good time of suprise sex?

They broke into his house at 3am. See, this is why your ideas fundamentally dont work.

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 18:18

he had been attacked and burgled in the past, he did not feel safe in his own home

as i have said, i truly believe that if he didnt have that gun then the burglars WOULD have attacked and possibly killed him, and certainly hospitalised him

queball · 13 Jun 2003, 18:19

Farmer = Palestine
Burglar = Isreal
Britain = America

Vanilla · 13 Jun 2003, 18:21

That;s why you have to shoot to kill.

Dead men can't sue.

roadrunner_0 · 13 Jun 2003, 18:21

no queball, cos then he would have got away with it!

Snurx · 13 Jun 2003, 18:21

Quote:

Originally posted by roadrunner_0
you really need to read a summary of the whole thing before you comment on it to be fair :/
but, from what i remember, the guy had been burgled before, and had been attacked in his home as well (correct me if i am wrong but i dont think i am) also, he lived in a fairly remote farmhouse so the police simply couldnt get there in time to do any good.
He had taken to carrying the loaded shotgun because he lived in fear - in his own home - a state that no one should have to put up with.
When he realised that someone was in his house and went to investigate, it was dark, and he didnt know if they were running towoard or away from him, also, he didnt know if they had weapons - it later was found that they did - and so took the steps to protect himself.
now, i fully agree that he shouldnt have shot the burglar had he any other choice but, to my mind, he didnt.
as i have also said, if he hadnt been carrying that shotgun, what are the odds of the newspaper headlines having said 'farmer killed in botched robbery' instead :/

I agree, i should know everything before i comment, and i apologize for that. It was my fault this time

He is not the only one that's been burgled before. What would you say if there was a newspaper article about some graffitikids having their arms broken by leadpipes, by the owner of a company that used the excuse "My property has been tagged on before, so i had to take action" Of course, the case is different, but not the "crime". Vigilante is not acceptabale, and as far as i know, this seems like a case of vigilantism. Of course, there are several factors here that none of us can be sure about, like lightning, words that were spoken, and the houseowners general feelings/reactions. All those migth give him a clear case, but i kinda doubt it.. And he pressed himself into that situation, if he really went after the burglars.. He should have called the cops and then locked himself into the bath or something.

Maybe he was right, maybe he was not. I can't pass guilt/notguilt, but i disagree whit his actions.

Oh, and on the headlines. I do not know the situation whit criminals in the UK, but in norway, that would most likely not have happened. The police take a burglary a little less serious then murder, and the crooks know this. So they would proably have tried to scare him away, and then bolted.

Nodrog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx
I agree, i should know everything before i comment, and i apologize for that. It was my fault this time
He is not the only one that's been burgled before. What would you say if there was a newspaper article about some graffitikids having their arms broken by leadpipes, by the owner of a company that used the excuse "My property has been tagged on before, so i had to take action" Of course, the case is different

If by "different" you mean "completely and utterly different to the degree where any attempt to draw analogy between the two is meaningless", then I agree. Self-defence in the heat of the moment is not the same as beating someone with a leadpipe when you are not in danger.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

Vigilante is not acceptabale, and as far as i know, this seems like a case of vigilantism.

Self defence isnt vigilantism

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

He should have called the cops

Its funny, beacuse you claim to be an anarchist.

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

Maybe he was right, maybe he was not. I can't pass guilt/notguilt, but i disagree whit his actions.

Well, you can. Either you agree with his actions and he isnt guilty, or you disagree with them and he is.

Black Dog · 13 Jun 2003, 18:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Was there any lighting, so that he could be aware whether the intruder was facing him, or had his back turned? If not, why is anything that you said even remotely relevant?

I read the case about a year ago and wrote an essay relating to it so I could be entirely wrong and would retract all I've said if I'm proven to be talking nonsense. From what I can remember the court held that he had gone past the gap in the stairs, otherwise he could not have shot the person since the angle would have been obscured by a door-frame or some other obstruction in the way.

The court therefore held that he had seen the intruder after passing this point, who was around the corner from the stairs, in which area he was capable of seeing the intruders. As I've said, if someone has a fresher memory than me, or can be bothered to read the judgment then please do so.

Kurashima · 13 Jun 2003, 20:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Forest

Now it appears, the judge has agreed that the burglars, have rights to sue the farmer.

Well one of them doesnt

Justice has not been done here. Yes , he deserved the sentence for shooting the man, as its been proven he lay in wait for intruders with a loaded shotgun. There was pre-meditation in his act, and as such, the sentence was appropriate. However when this case comes to trial and he attempts to sue Tony Martin , the burglar has now stated that the hobby which he cannot pursue due to the injury is MARTIAL ARTS ..... hence if it can be proven this man was trained to a reasonable degree in martial arts, then Tony Martin had a right to fear for his life and fire the weapon.

Personally , i wish this to come to trial , and i wish to see the Burglar lose the case and be forced to pay costs running into tens of thousands of pounds.

Hes a thieving scumbag making a mockery of the legal system.

YAHWE , DONT EVEN THINK OF ENTERING THIS THREAD AND DEFENDING THE ****!

bobble · 13 Jun 2003, 20:25

the fact that the farmer is in jail is a joke.

pathetic

Deffeh · 13 Jun 2003, 20:45

light or dark, firing a warning shot into the air or at their feet would still have been possible.

Toop · 13 Jun 2003, 23:15

I remember a dutch shopkeeper who had been robbed 7 times set deadly traps in his store

. He was ordered to remove them though

. It seems kinda weird that it's not allowed to defend your own property, but on the other hand killing someone for some money might be a little out of proportion.

W · 13 Jun 2003, 23:23

I believe the criminals should, and do have, exactly the same rights as the victims.

Vaio · 13 Jun 2003, 23:26

Didn't notice but has anyone mentioned the guy who wants to sue Martin is currently in jail for drug smuggling ? Perhaps he should have shot them both.

Vaio

Vaio · 13 Jun 2003, 23:29

Quote:

Originally posted by W
I believe the criminals should, and do have, exactly the same rights as the victims.

Criminals have more rights.

Vaio

Sandsnake · 14 Jun 2003, 00:11

This is why I'm a firm beleiver that homes are sacrosanct." You can argue all you want, but the second you come into my home and present a threat to me and my family, your life is forfeit.

By breaking and entering, you CHOOSE to take that risk. By your choice, your life is at risk. I did not come to your home and murder you. You came to mine and got yourself killed.

I don't think anyone who's ever had someone come into their house and threaten or harm them, would ever feel differently. That you put a criminal's life above that of an innocent person in a situation where the criminal has entered that person's space is asinine.

There is NO crime prevention, because there is nothing pro-active occurring. Police are reactionary, so fat lot of good they do you. Nevermind, they don't even pursue a vast majority of the crimes.

huh · 14 Jun 2003, 00:29

I'd have killed him. He gave up the right to live by breaking into his home.

Hunter RAF · 14 Jun 2003, 00:30

farmer should be released. i should be given the gun to finish of the job, stop him complaining about the first shot ruining his sex life

Deffeh · 14 Jun 2003, 01:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandsnake
This is why I'm a firm beleiver that homes are sacrosanct." You can argue all you want, but the second you come into my home and present a threat to me and my family, your life is forfeit.

By breaking and entering, you CHOOSE to take that risk. By your choice, your life is at risk. I did not come to your home and murder you. You came to mine and got yourself killed.

I don't think anyone who's ever had someone come into their house and threaten or harm them, would ever feel differently. That you put a criminal's life above that of an innocent person in a situation where the criminal has entered that person's space is asinine.

There is NO crime prevention, because there is nothing pro-active occurring. Police are reactionary, so fat lot of good they do you. Nevermind, they don't even pursue a vast majority of the crimes.

i had a fight with my mate in my house before, who then sweeped some glass ornaments off a table smashing them and he threw a punch at me and was prepared to throw more

I suppose i should have wait till his back was turned then shot him.

I was only protecting my home and my life

Sandsnake · 14 Jun 2003, 01:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Deffeh
i had a fight with my mate in my house before, who then sweeped some glass ornaments off a table smashing them and he threw a punch at me and was prepared to throw more

I suppose i should have wait till his back was turned then shot him.

I was only protecting my home and my life

that's a far cry from someone you don't know coming into your house with unknown intentions and unknown abilities.

You knew that your mate wasn't going to kill you or probably even hurt you that much. I break into your house, you don't know what I'm going to do or am willing to do. Hesitation in that situation can get you killed or extremely hurt.

JammyJim · 14 Jun 2003, 01:41

the one thing i love about america is that if someone breaks into your home you can shoot them dead and can never be put on trial for murder

we SHOULD have the right to defend our property.

Mirai · 14 Jun 2003, 01:49

Quote:

Originally posted by JammyJim
the one thing i love about america is that if someone breaks into your home you can shoot them dead and can never be put on trial for murder

we SHOULD have the right to defend our property.

That may be true, but if he falls through your skylight and impales himself on his flashlight that he was carrying in his mouth to see, then he can sue you. Same goes for drowning in your swimming pool.