Thread: Home invasion

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.