Thread: Home invasion

"Everyone please don't try to defend yourself when someone invades your home and attacks you and your family. We need to ensure the rights and wellbeing of the offender are fully protected."

If the law doesn't give criminals what they deserve, then members of the public will be forced to take the law in their own hands. To be honest I'm very disappointed that only a finger was cut off.

If you defend yourself by cutting someone's finger off while they present no threat then you'll be prosecuted.

Originally Posted by Longrun

If you defend yourself by cutting someone's finger off while they present no threat then you'll be prosecuted.

I imagine the crim cut his own finger when laying on the knife. It's his balls that really needed removed

Originally Posted by Longrun

If you defend yourself by cutting someone's finger off while they present no threat then you'll be prosecuted.

While they posses a knife with intent?

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

I imagine the crim cut his own finger when laying on the knife. It's his balls that really needed removed

My thoughts too.


Sent from my SM-J530Y using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by 300CALMAN

While they posses a knife with intent?

while they are already beaten and incapacitated.

Originally Posted by Longrun

while they are already beaten and incapacitated.

Incapacitated would be with both arms broken

Truss him up and ph the Gimp, he's not Marcellas Wallace

Originally Posted by Longrun

while they are already beaten and incapacitated.

And deservedly so some might say!

I doubt if any of this would have happened if 9 finger hadn't been on someone else's property trying to fuck them.
Seems like it was more or less self inflicted.
Hope they made 9 finger clean up the mess he apparently made,leaking body fluid in those poor people's house

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

And deservedly so some might say!

yes, a good thrashing in 'self defense' you could make a case for IF it would even be prosecuted.

What's happened here is quite another matter. @unmodified do you mind describing how this was 'more or less self inflicted'

Assuming that they did cut the brats finger off how many of you LFAO's think it was justified? And if it was justified, just what punitive action would you actually stop at? 'Cos thats the acid test - how good is our self control and rationality under testing circumstances.

I think some here watch too many action/retribution movies.
Fair enough if you're indulging in some flippant fantasy but if these are earnest sentiments....

Everyone saying that use of force is justified as self defence under S48 Crimes Act needs to remember that its not a blanket "I can do what I want".

"Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or herself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, it is reasonable to use."

That force needs to be reasonable and proportionate to the threat that the person is defending themselves from IE if the offender is lying on the ground at gunpoint and beaten is it reasonable and proportionate to step forward and cut off his finger to defend myself? That act doesn't seem like something I'd do if I genuinely feared for my safety and isn't exactly a reasonable way of defending myself, particularly if I'm saying things like "it's so people know you're a thief" etc and filming it.

Since we all agree that some force during this incident was authorised by law that naturally leads us to S62 of the Crimes Act

"Every one authorised by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess."

Based on the above it seems the appropriate place for this discussion is indeed the Court because it appears on the face of it that there is a case to be heard. What that outcome may be will be the Judge or Jurys call. As an aside I see the offender has already been charged with aggravated burglary and some other bits so is also being held to account under the law.

Remember that in these cases it's not what we may wish to see but what the law is. Like @Thar has mentioned LFAOs we more than most need to understand our obligations under the law and if we don't agree with them to vote accordingly for change, not decide to do as we may wish in the moment less we lose our license or end up in the dock ourselves.

Every one authorised by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

so %50 of the police at the wellington protest should be in court then ....

In my opinion anyone who REPEATEDLY breaks in to a house , armed with a weapon - be it a knife or a wine bottle or both , assaults/beats the owner , threatens to kill them (and openly admits it in court)have VOLUNTARILY removed any rights they might have as a normal human being in a decent society and deserve everything they get ... with bells on .