UK news: Man Who Killed Armed Intruder Jailed Eight Years


PDA






papercut
March 23, 2004, 12:18 PM
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2687311

Man Who Killed Armed Intruder Jailed Eight Years

By Will Batchelor, PA News
Tue 23 Mar 2004

A man who stabbed to death an armed intruder at his home was jailed for eight years today.

Carl Lindsay, 25, answered a knock at his door in Salford, Greater Manchester, to find four men armed with a gun.

When the gang tried to rob him he grabbed a samurai sword and stabbed one of them, 37-year-old Stephen Swindells, four times.

Mr Swindells, of Salford, was later found collapsed in an alley and died in hospital.

Lindsay, of Walkden, was found guilty of manslaughter following a three-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.

He was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.

After the case, Detective Chief Inspector Sam Haworth said: “Four men, including the victim, had set out purposefully to rob Carl Lindsay and this intent ultimately led to Stephen Swindells’ death.

“I believe the sentences passed today reflect the severity of the circumstances.”

Three other men were charged with robbery and firearms offences in connection with the incident, which took place in February last year.

If you enjoyed reading about "UK news: Man Who Killed Armed Intruder Jailed Eight Years" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
sturmruger
March 23, 2004, 12:37 PM
That is the one of the saddest stories I have ever read. I feel sorry for the whole damn nation.

fslflint
March 23, 2004, 12:38 PM
that is disgusting.

RobW
March 23, 2004, 12:42 PM
Good example how to subdue citizens. Without criminals, it wouldn't be that easy to oppress a whole citizenship. Thus, the government is the accomplice of violent criminals.

We have a lot of "Liberals" that want to have us at the same point :barf:

AJ Dual
March 23, 2004, 12:42 PM
State sponsored persecution of self-defense IS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION.

Unless there's some unreported mitigating circumstance, like the homeownder stabbed the robber after they dropped the gun, or were running away, I guess that throws Agricola's claims of reasonable matching force is still considered justified in the U.K.

(Leaving alone how asinine a standard that is to apply to the victim...)
i.e. burglar brings a club, you can club back, brings a knife, you can stab back, brings a gun... well there are no legal handguns in England, so the criminals won't have one either right? :rolleyes:

This guy was already at a mismatch sword vs. gun, and he still got charged, looks like the U.K. court system doesn't even play by thier own rules.

In some U.S. states, ciminals who have an accomplice who dies due to justified self-defense in the comission of a crime can even be charged with murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide etc.

El Tejon
March 23, 2004, 12:42 PM
Good reminder of Problem #2. No matter what the Yeehaws say there will be consequences for taking a fellow human's life.

Freedomv
March 23, 2004, 12:49 PM
A perversion of justise, absolutly nauseous.
vern

P95Carry
March 23, 2004, 12:54 PM
“I believe the sentences passed today reflect the severity of the circumstances.” Yeah????????????????? And reflected on whom?? From the info available I'd say there was a total and utter use of ''justifiable force'' - it's called (you paying attention UK freakin Gov?) -- ''SELF DEFENCE!!!! .... what? One onto four? Great odds eh? So maybe he should have decided to let himself be beaten or shot. Hard to believe he ''invited them for coffee''!!!

WHAT is the matter with them there?? Why this emphasis all the time on ''you can't defend yourself''? It makes me mad!

I was spawned in that rat hole of a nation ..... and this embarrasses me .... it appalls me and disgusts me too. Talk about subjugation .... whatever happened to basic rights? Oh I forgot, they have been ''denied''.

Sorry to rant but hell .. this takes the biscuit.:cuss: :banghead: :mad:

Zedicus
March 23, 2004, 01:05 PM
This is exactly why I'm practicaly breaking my neck to get out of this god forsaken hell hole...:banghead:

Jim March
March 23, 2004, 01:46 PM
The BBC still has the "initial story" up:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2811145.stm

Saturday, 1 March, 2003, 14:04 GMT

Man charged with stabbing murder

A man was due to appear in court on Saturday accused of murdering a 33-year-old man in Greater Manchester.
Stephen Swindells was found in a car park near Gore Street, in Pendleton, Salford, after being stabbed on Thursday night.

Mr Swindells, of Rockley Gardens, Higher Broughton, died from his injuries in Hope Hospital.

Carl Lindsay, 24, of Sandwich Walk, Walkden, was due to appear before Salford magistrates on Saturday charged with his murder.

A 31-year-old man from Farnworth and an 18-year-old man from Bolton have been released without charge.

-------------

Jim again. Looks to me like the cops made the initial bust assuming the swordsman was the assailant, and charged him that way.

Once they realized it was a robbery defense, they didn't want to admit having made a mistake right at the get-go. Betcha anything that's part of the sick psychology involved.

Folks, this is a LOT WORSE than the Tony Martin case. The two idiots that tried to burgle Martin's house weren't armed. Granted, Martin had no way to know that in the dark and "hot burglaries" are extremely dangerous.

Still, in THIS case the assailants were up-front with a gun. Lindsay did NOT break any weapons laws! There is not ONE place in the US that would have given him the slightest legal grief....even the "four stab wounds" is meaningless because contrary to Hollywood, stabs don't have a lot of "stopping power".

This is just...unreal.

:fire:

Diggler
March 23, 2004, 02:27 PM
Think about it... we can just go over there, invade and conquer. It would only take two or three people. If anyone tries to fight back, we'll just have them jailed for attempted murder.

:rolleyes:

Nazirite
March 23, 2004, 02:39 PM
:barf: Absolutely pathetic, what was the judge and prosecutors thinking. This guy should have been give a medal for removing trash from the street.

HankB
March 23, 2004, 02:43 PM
The BG was only stabbed? Must not have been a good samurai sword, or Lindsay just didn't know how to use it. Or maybe it was "just" a tanto.

I'd expect a well-made katana could have . . . bisected . . . the miscreants.

Surprised agricola hasn't chimed in yet to defend the verdict against Carl Lindsay. Waiting . . . :rolleyes:

strambo
March 23, 2004, 03:27 PM
:barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :cuss: :cuss: :banghead:

Nightfall
March 23, 2004, 03:46 PM
Any peon that dares infringe on the government's exclusive right to take lives shall be punished harshly! As members of society in similar standing to the mighty government, criminals shall be excluded. :barf:

What a sick, twisted place. A single man with a sword is attacking by 4 thugs with a gun, and he goes to jail for 8 years for stabbing one in self-defense. Well, it certainly doesn't surprise me that anti-gunners idolize that place as a utopia... :banghead:

Travis McGee
March 23, 2004, 04:07 PM
Un-freaking-believable, even in England!

http://matthewbracken.web.aplus.net/snakelogo.jpg

mussi
March 23, 2004, 04:19 PM
I'm - ummm - somewhat surprised. :barf:

Here, just 1200 km further to the South, an armed burglar has been okayed by the law to serve as backstop (use a sensible caliber - overpenetration can be laid out as negligence and result in charges) for your continuous training.

Seems to me that the Swiss Army should invade the UK, train the Tommys in real cuisine and implant them some balls.

Newton
March 23, 2004, 04:30 PM
That would be the brave Swiss Army that stood by while the Germans committed genocide.

The Swiss are a worthless bunch of cowards.





Newton

mussi
March 23, 2004, 04:41 PM
I'll not hijack this thread, but remember it's always easier to judge afterwards. Remember that in 1940, Switzerland (and for that reason, any other non-axis country) and any other country would have been beat by the Germans. Cany anybody answer why the Allies didn't bomb the railway to Auschwitz?

Sometimes, arranging yourself with the bully right next to your door is the better part of valor than getting invaded and fighting a bloody 5 year guerilla war. That's maybe why we still own 'dangerous' guns. All other European countries 'liberated' by the Allied in WW2 have strict gun laws? Freedon?

But we're not into a 'what-if' thread, but rather why the Brits even think about sentencing something, that less than 1000 miles further to the south, is regarded as self-defense. Seems like British beef is a predominant dish amongst Brit judges....now let's rather talk how we occupy this country full of pansies, steal their best whisky and make them a Swiss colony so they have to buy our cheese. :)

StLGlocker
March 23, 2004, 05:31 PM
That verdict is just unbelievable. I suppose the Crown would be happier if the homeowner had been killed instead. Stabbing a thug who bursts into your home and sticks a gun in your face is a perfectly reasonable response, and to lock the man up for eight years when all he did was use equal force to defend himself is criminal.

Thank God the founders of this country decided they'd had enough of English rule 228 years ago.

R-Tex12
March 23, 2004, 05:32 PM
Anyone else notice that the defender (victim) is referred to by only his last name, "Lindsay", while the BG is referred to as "Mr Swindells"?

Lindsay, of Walkden, was found guilty of manslaughter following a three-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.
Mr Swindells, of Salford, was later found collapsed in an alley and died in hospital.

Obviously, the criminals are more deserving of the media's respect than are the victims. :cuss:

R-Tex12

Cooter Brown
March 23, 2004, 05:34 PM
Was Mr. Lindsay convicted by a panel of Judges, or by a jury of his peers? Unfortunately, it has been my experience that once the state prosecutors choose to charge a person with an crime, no matter how absurd, the defendant's butt is in a major sling--juries rarely acquit!!! Never underestimate the stupidity and cruelty of the general populace. :banghead:

igor
March 23, 2004, 05:38 PM
mussi, I hear you up here...

To the point, this is an extreme outrage, if we're seeing all the facts available. *** was that BS about "severity of circumstances" anyway? Administratese for "we're on a highway to hell and don't you think anyone can change that course"?

Zedicus
March 23, 2004, 06:26 PM
Anyone else notice that the defender (victim) is referred to by only his last name, "Lindsay", while the BG is referred to as "Mr Swindells"?



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lindsay, of Walkden, was found guilty of manslaughter following a three-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Swindells, of Salford, was later found collapsed in an alley and died in hospital.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Obviously, the criminals are more deserving of the media's respect than are the victims.

R-Tex12

In a country where Self Defence is 99% outlawed, this is actualy viewed as normal....:barf:

iamkris
March 23, 2004, 06:37 PM
I'd very much like to see if anyone from the UK has more detailed information on this case.

If so, let's see it.

If the facts are as they appear above, I DARE anyone from the UK (or anywhere else) to explain this one away.

The UK is a shell of what it once was. Yes I'm generalizing but there are very few left there who have the sense of a drunken marmot when it comes to personal liberties or self defense.

I've done a fair amount of travelling in my short life and have been thoroughly disgusted by the amount of freedoms traded in for a false sense of "government nanny-hood" by people of other countries...:banghead: :barf:

Standing Wolf
March 23, 2004, 06:49 PM
If it's made in England, I don't buy it.

iamkris
March 23, 2004, 08:50 PM
Sorry, got a little emotional there folks but **sheesh** come on people...we don't even do that to someone in **********...:banghead:










...do we?:uhoh:

Balog
March 23, 2004, 09:01 PM
I'm still waiting for agricola to come and try to defend his socialist paradise.

That has to be one of the sickest miscarriages of justice I've ever seen. England further entrenches it's reputation as a violator of basic human rights. :barf:

Baba Louie
March 23, 2004, 10:46 PM
To coin a phrase... well to quote one actually...

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
geo orwell, 1984

(well two out of three ain't bad)

That's a strong, free society reflected in the news account. Disturbing is putting it mildly. Wouldn't play in Peoria... (well, maybe Dallas or Phoenix is a better city selection)

It does make me wonder what evidence was presented and allowed and what other laws have degenerated from ye Olde Common Law in Merry Olde...

Maybe it was because it was an oriental sword instead of an Excaliber replica :rolleyes: or that the only witnesses to testify were on the side of and friends of the "deceased victim"

After the case, Detective Chief Inspector Sam Haworth said: “Four men, including the victim, had set out purposefully to rob Carl Lindsay and this intent ultimately led to Stephen Swindells’ death. I like our laws a whole lot better. The other three would be charged with homicide... it may be that us backwards Colonists just haven't got it figured out (shaking head)

Braz
March 24, 2004, 12:55 AM
:scrutiny:

Hate the policy, not the whole nation. Things may change if more of these insane headlines pop up in the future. At the very least, the accused now understands how law abiding citizens become criminals by defending their very life. He may have gained a few friends along the way.

Next will be a sword ban like the Aussies have down under.

"Video cameras are everywhere to save you. If attacked, do not resist. It blurs the picture and makes identifying the alleged assailant more difficult. Die politely, go quietly with a gurgle or a whimper. Stiff upper lip."

This one must be over turned, right? :confused:

The_Antibubba
March 24, 2004, 01:16 AM
is there a human rights group that defends those who are convicted of defending themselves against agression? I know that there have been such cases here in the US, but what about in Europe-an equivalent to ACLU or Amnesty Int. for State-perpetrated violence?

pbman
March 24, 2004, 02:41 AM
Damn that is sad, and i cross posted that for agricola wear he would see it.

I wonder how he will try and explain this?

4570Rick
March 24, 2004, 02:55 AM
:fire: :banghead:

Jim March
March 24, 2004, 03:32 AM
My boss went and opened a London office just in time :rolleyes:.

(Boss=Alan Gottlieb, http://www.ccrkba.org)

Stand_Watie
March 24, 2004, 05:42 AM
Here's the best bit...


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3561555.stm

"His three accomplices were found guilty of robbery and firearms offences and sentenced to fourteen years."


That's 14 years between the three of them - that's how the BBC reports multiple convictions to try and lend the impression that the courts are handing down more severe sentences than they really did.

4 1/2 years each for the bad guys for home invasion, assault and weapons posession(not to mention the felony murder), and 8 years for the victim for self defence.

Unbelievable. Justice would have the judge as these guys next victim (there will be more, it's just a question of whom) when they are paroled in 2 years.

Range Ninja
March 24, 2004, 08:30 AM
That is absolutely sickening. Charging a man for defending himself in his own home!

igor
March 24, 2004, 08:46 AM
The question about Amnesty International was a veeeeeeery good one... they waste their time and resources on plenty more worthless people. I wonder how they'd react if presented this kind of a case?

(I dated an AI activist during my adventurous years at the university... :D )

mr_dove
March 24, 2004, 08:58 AM
I don't know much about the politics in the part of the world but I noticed that the article is from a Scottish paper. Isn't there some kind of ill feeling between Scotland and England? Is Scottland still fighting for freedom from "the crown"?

Perhaps this is part of the reason behind this.

Also remember that England has been persecuting its citizens for many hundreds of years. Isn't that the reason that our forefathers came here and fought so valiently to establish this great nation.

It merely seems that England has learned nothing despite the many wars. They continue subjugate their own people.

I looked for a way to e-mail the paper but found nothing. It seems that more research is in order.

El Tejon
March 24, 2004, 09:26 AM
iamkris, O.K., I'll explain it. When you use deadly force against a fellow human being, all kinds of bad things can happen. These bad things are Problem #2. Despite the rampant Yeehawish of the Errornet, Problem #2 exists every time you hurt your fellow man.

Just because you can use deadly force does not mean that you should. What seems a good idea at the time will later be judged months later by a legal standard that you may be unaware of at the time. What you think is "reasonable and proper" may not be want a jury/judge thinks is the right thing to do.

cxm
March 24, 2004, 10:26 AM
And people wonder why nearly one out of every four in UK have been a crime victim?

V/r

Chuck

BTR
March 24, 2004, 10:38 AM
I suspect there may be more to the case than what was reported. This is just too absurd.

El Tejon
March 24, 2004, 10:48 AM
BTR, you mean the stab wounds to the back?:uhoh: Yeah, maybe something to do with the verdict. (Don't say that on THR. It would simply destroy the myth that your home is a free fire zone where anything that happens is "nice and legal." Legal advice from Chief Wiggum.:D).

natedog
March 24, 2004, 10:54 AM
:( We cannot allow this to happen in the US- we must fight.

Daniel T
March 24, 2004, 11:49 AM
LT, do you know for sure that the stab wounds were to the back? Do you have a cite for it? That would sure add some clarity to this mess.

iamkris
March 24, 2004, 12:24 PM
El T

I agree with Daniel T...that's what I'm looking for...real facts. I usually respect what you write on this board but this time I don't quite understand what you're saying. (Frankly, your response to me didn't make any sense...maybe my coffee hasn't kicked in yet.)

You're acting like you have more info than the rest of us on the case...what is it? Stab wounds to the back could certainly look bad in a court of law...then again, it depends on the circumstances. Big difference between stabing someone who is fleeing from you or on the floor in front of you versus stabbing in the back if someone (or his buddies) is maneuvering around you for another go at you.

Cosmoline
March 24, 2004, 12:40 PM
Actually, if an armed gang invades your home, you should feel absolutely free to stab or shoot them in the back. Preferably you should shoot them all in the back from a dark corner behind solid cover. At least where I come from, you are not required to stand up and offer yourself as a target by yelling at them or switching on a bunch of lights to mark your profile. If they are armed and have broken into your house while you are there, it's entirely reasonable to assume they will kill you. It's about as imminent a deadly threat as you can get. Announcing yourself or even trying to escape can and probably will lead to your own death.

Things are quite different in the UK, as we all know. A once proud people have been reduced to the level of sheep by a long series of socialist governments since WWII. And the gov'ment don't want sheep that fight back! That might make it dangerous for the politicos when it's time for them to be shorn.

Cooter Brown
March 24, 2004, 01:53 PM
Heheheheheheh... I once remarked in Army basic bayonette training that if anyone ever stabbed me with cold steel, it would be in the arse, because I'd d be hoofing it in the opposit direction!!!! :neener:

deleteall
March 24, 2004, 02:14 PM
...

Zedicus
March 24, 2004, 02:30 PM
intresting comments on this site
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/comments/view.html?story_id=85176

Here's some of the ones from UK residents that caught my eye.

One of two things has obviously happened here. 1. there is much more information about this story that the media have so "conveniently forgotton" to include (let's face it, they do it all the time for a sensational story). or 2. the police, jury, and judge left their brains at home. It just doesn't make sense!!
Carl, Manchester
24/03/04 at 11:02

Good point that I agree completely with. (speaking of above quote)

Could all Americans please leave this topic alone and go back to grieving for the THOUSANDS of people killed by handguns in your own country. That said, everyone should have some right to protect themselves from intruders, however I don't believe that extends to being allowed to keep a samurai sword to hand then stab someone four times with it. If you keep a weapon at your door it isn't decorative, it's there to be used, and in the case of a samurai sword it's likely to be fatal. It's right he should be punished, although I will concede 8 years seems a lot.
Leo, Manchester
24/03/04 at 11:33

What on earth is this prejuduced Idiot Smoking??:banghead:

It appears the lunatics really have taken control of the asylum, when it comes to distributing justice in Manchester. I hope I never get mugged in Manchester next time I visit the city - I don't want to be sued by a thief for not having enough money on me to steal.
Steve, East Sussex
24/03/04 at 09:20

Intresting way to put it...

This is the most absurd travesty to have befallen someone who chose to defend his home from a couple of armed miscreants. The irony of it all is that the remaining robbers would probably be sentenced to less prison time than Mr. Lindsay.
Albert Fitzgerald, London
24/03/04 at 03:48

Yep!

The Law has gone mad, are we supposed to stand back and watch people steal our posetions and let them beat us to a pulp??? Come on, wake up for god's sake, the Law is an ass in Britian. I give up, I really do.
T. Hawkins, Swinton, Gtr. Manchester
23/03/04 at 20:11

Know the feeling dude...

Dunno about you guys, but it looks like much of the UK is Furious over this total Miscarrage of Justace.

iamkris
March 24, 2004, 04:20 PM
Cosmoline -- I agree...just said it would look bad to all the sheeple in the jury...

Zedicus -- glad to see there are at least a few sane people in the UK...then again "Leo from Manchester" sums up the attitude that most people I meet and/or work with from the UK have.

murrie
March 24, 2004, 06:38 PM
Looks like he might not have been completely inocent: Seems the guy who got 8 years was a drug dealer and on top of that chased them out of his house before stabbing them:


http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/lancashire/bolton/news/NEWS8.html

A WALKDEN drug dealer was today starting an eight-year jail sentence for stabbing a 37-year-old Salford robber to death with a samurai sword. ...

"As they fled you stabbed one assailant four times in the back," he told Lindsay.

"You took a life by deliberate retaliation using a lethal weapon you kept in your home when aware you were a high risk target."



The 3 guys that lived got 14 years each in jail.

P95Carry
March 24, 2004, 06:46 PM
I guess - as ever - initial facts are rarely complete. I had been wondering whether the whole thing was wrapped around dealing.

Even so .... unless the sword wielder was being booked on drug matters ... still seems like 4 onto one deserves some chance of a guy defending himself legitimately. The ''back stabbing'' aspect sure doesn't help tho.

More than meets the eye.

Baba Louie
March 24, 2004, 07:14 PM
Oops.
Pardon me while I remove both feet from my mouth and come out from under my bridge.
Methinks I doth protest too much :p
Jeepers, a DRUG DEAL gone bad?
That NEVER happens here boy :rolleyes:

All they haddado was say that in the first place.

My apologies to the fine people of the United Kingdom for any and all of the implications I may have earlier stated. First blush and all that.

I'll probably be found lurking in the bushes for a while... I think that's still legal.

Back to your regulary scheduled posting.

El Tejon
March 24, 2004, 10:25 PM
YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THAT THERE IS MORE TO A CRIMINAL CASE THAN A TWO PARAGRAPH BLURB WRITTEN BY A HACK STRINGER!!!

No, no, stabbed in the back! El Tejon is lying! Why in Tejas I can chase a man down the street and properly ventilate him!

Imagine a jury hearing about the evidence that was reported with this case was originally prosecuted and THRers said "this prosecution wouldn't happen in Tejas" would convict for manslaughter! Egad, what a thought, that the law, the law may have some bearing on one's use of deadly force.

The only dimwit around here who thinks that the law is involved in my Walter Mitty/can't happen in Tejas world is El Tejon and he's nuts! I feel that I need to bash England when I really have no idea how complex a criminal case can be or how dismal a job the media is at reporting a story that takes more than two (2) paragraphs.

P.S.--El Tejon is nuts, I wanna kill people cause it's my right and I just bought a new gun.:uhoh:

P.P.S.--Next El Tejon will be telling us on the prosecution of the Muslim chaplin in Cuber and Kobe Bryant is racist drivel disguised as the law.

El Tejon
March 24, 2004, 10:48 PM
BTW, no criminal case is as straight forward as the media reports. The media, out of ignorance and convenience, leaves most of the relevant facts out. This plays into the Passion of the Errornet as we just witnessed as well as the selective memory displayed when this case was originally prosecuted. How do you think I remembered that D chased homeskillets down the street and ventilated them in the back? I READ IT ON . . . [English accent activated--"wait for it"] . . . THR (IIRC).

I've detailed a sword case that I had nearly 3 years ago. Go back and look at that as a true case of self-defence (5'1" female uses "Conan the Barbarian" sword to break BJJ chokehold on her son. Arrested and convicted by the media. Because of defense re-investigation of incident, all charges dropped).

Remember, in criminal law, the answer is ALWAYS "it depends.":D

4v50 Gary
March 24, 2004, 11:00 PM
Time for England to return to the Common Law days when a man's home was his castle and there was no duty to retreat from one's castle.

El Tejon
March 25, 2004, 12:12 PM
Man, the crickets are deafening.

Wonder why this thread got cold?
:confused:

Cooter Brown
March 25, 2004, 01:04 PM
Hell, if all the players had been armed with guns maybe none of them would have been left around to go to trial. Also, FYI, in Madison, Wisconsin USA, (A/K/A " Moscow on Lake Monona") recently, a woman drug dealer shot and killed 2 very fooolish men who broke into her home and tried to rob her. No charges filed. Now that's civilized, even in whack-o Madison, WI.. :evil:

El Tejon
March 25, 2004, 01:54 PM
Did she chased them out of the house and shoot them in the back?:confused:

Cooter Brown
March 25, 2004, 02:16 PM
Actually, I believe that she did finish the job on one of the scum in the front yard.....good riddance.

papercut
March 25, 2004, 02:28 PM
Looks like he might not have been completely inocent: Seems the guy who got 8 years was a drug dealer and on top of that chased them out of his house before stabbing them:

quote:
A WALKDEN drug dealer was today starting an eight-year jail sentence for stabbing a 37-year-old Salford robber to death with a samurai sword. ...

"As they fled you stabbed one assailant four times in the back," he told Lindsay.

"You took a life by deliberate retaliation using a lethal weapon you kept in your home when aware you were a high risk target."

From what I can see, he wasn't charged with any drug crimes related to this incident; he was only charged with killing a robber in self-defense. We can argue the niceties of whether or not chasing them down should be a factor or not (did he stab the guy 10 feet outside the door, or 10 yards down the street?), but that doesn't change the fact that he was assaulted with a ranged weapon (i.e., one capable of attack outside of arms' length).

Had he not chased them, then it is certainly conceivable that one or more of the robbers could have stopped, turned, and fired on him. Since he did not have a ranged weapon (gun, crossbow, bow, spear, etc.) with which to defend himself, personally, I would be inclined to accept that he had little choice but to chase them a little.

As for being a drug dealer, so? In the U.S., even criminals have a right to self-defense, although the standards are a little higher for them to prove it. (I confess, however, that had he been killed, I wouldn't shed any tears over one less drug dealer in the world.)

El Tejon
March 25, 2004, 03:06 PM
paper, most assuredly chasing someone down does factor into whether one is acting in self-defense. The aggressor is not allowed self-defense as a defense nor is one who subject to attack by one who disengages and withdraws.

"Had he not chased them"???:confused: Is that a Motion to Change the Facts?:D

Chasing someone down and stabbing them in the back is a hard sell to a jury for self-defense.:rolleyes:

Daniel T
March 25, 2004, 04:11 PM
El Tejon is lying!

Who said you were lying? I (and iamkris) asked you for a cite, but in your hysteria you seem to equate that with "El Tejon is lying!". Sorry buddy, there is a difference.

Also, who, besides you, said anything about Texas?

For the record, I had my doubts about that case as reported, which is why I asked for a cite. You know, to show some evidence to everyone that what you said was accurate.

If you enjoyed reading about "UK news: Man Who Killed Armed Intruder Jailed Eight Years" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!