Stan 386 Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Note to the NEP after a pathetic legal verdict in Nottingham. DAD TOOK STRAP TO BOY OF 15 A Sneinton man ended up in court for retaliating against a 15-year-old boy who had hit him with an iron bar and put his daughter in a headlock. A pair of teenage boys had thrown eggs at Carl Potter's home in Skipton Circus, Sneinton, after his two daughters refused to go outside to meet them. The girls eventually went outside and the 15-year-old boy put one of them in a headlock. Potter, 38, was woken by the noise and chased the boy. The youngster ran into his house and came back outside brandishing a metal pole, with which he hit Potter on the legs. Potter chased him back into the house and hit the boy with his belt. Though a custodial sentence was considered, Potter was given a one-year supervision order, 150 hours of community service and ordered to pay £60 in court costs. The Facts. 1. Potter`s property was attacked. 2. Potter`s family was attacked. 3. Potter was attacked with a metal bar. 4. The offender accidentally fell as he ran away from potter as he defended himself from attack with a metal bar. The law. It is important to ensure that all those acting reasonably and in good faith to defend themselves, their family, their property or in the prevention of crime or the apprehension of offenders are not prosecuted for such action. When reviewing cases involving assertions of self-defence or action in the prevention of crime/preservation of property, prosecutors should be aware of the balance to be struck: the public interest in promoting a responsible contribution on the part of citizens in preserving law and order. Self-defence is available as a defence to crimes committed by use of force. The basic principles of self-defence are set out in Palmer v R, [1971] A.C 814; see also <Archbold 19-41>. "It is both good law and good sense that a man who is attacked may defend himself. It is both good law and good sense that he may do, but only do, what is reasonably necessary." The sooner this case is reviewed by the Court of Appeal and David Chinery corrected the better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stan 386 Posted August 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Further. Provocation in English law. In criminal law, provocation is a possible defense by excuse or exculpation alleging a sudden or temporary loss of control (a permanent loss of control is in the realm of insanity) as a response to another's provocative conduct sufficient to justify an acquittal, a mitigated sentence or a conviction for a lesser charge. Provocation can be a relevant factor in a court's assessment of a defendant's mens rea, intention, or state of mind, at the time of an act of which the defendant is accused. The right of self-defense (also called alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in violence for the sake of self-defense of one's own life or the lives of others, including the use of deadly force. In Scotland the age of responsibility is eight years, In England and Wales and Northern Ireland the age of responsibility is ten years . Surely therefore the boy was guilty of several offences and should have been charged andnot Potter? (Attacking his daughter,attacking his property, attacking Potter) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stan 386 Posted August 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 How much longer do the British people have to tolerate a totally useless legal and police system? Parliament is overflowing with lawyers.They will not help. ALL suggestions welcome. The youth in question was 15 years(some youths of that age can be a formidable size) He was armed with an iron bar which could easily have killed Potter. Potter was UNARMED until he took off his belt in self defense. The right of self-defense (also called alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in violence for the sake of self-defense of one's own life or the lives of others, including the use of deadly force. In Scotland the age of responsibility is eight years, In England and Wales and Northern Ireland the age of responsibility is ten years . Surely therefore the boy was guilty of several offences and should have been charged and not Potter? (Attacking his daughter,attacking his property, attacking Potter) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rob237 89 Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Whilst sharing your disquiet and annoyance at this abysmal prosecution, I'm beginning to become concerned that 95% of your postings nowadays are based on open criiticism of the country that you chose to leave many years ago. Worsened by the fact that your source is invariably the diabolical Evening Post... Is everything in Oz perceived as being 'hunky-dory'? Cheers Robt P. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Since Skippy died, Oz's gone down hill somewhat. "What's that Skip, Blighty's gone to the dogs!, so all the winging Poms are here, Well Strooth!" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stan 386 Posted August 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Whilst sharing your disquiet and annoyance at this abysmal prosecution, I'm beginning to become concerned that 95% of your postings nowadays are based on open criiticism of the country that you chose to leave many years ago.Worsened by the fact that your source is invariably the diabolical Evening Post... Is everything in Oz perceived as being 'hunky-dory'? Cheers Robt P. Suggest you have a read through my posts,rob. Most of the newspaper quotes I choose are from the Telegraph or Guardian. Very few from the NEP. Certainly poor old England is so far behind Oz, it would be difficult for you all to comprehend. No ,its by no means perfect and already slipping since the socialists came to power,but as in the UK the people are awakening at last. Careful of the knives and bullets rob. OOps sorry,-forgotten you are not under 17 and thus immune. Iwonder if we should be substituting Rob for Martin in the following. Some believe that the blogosphere is a mere "cacophony", a narcissistic sounding board. Not worth taking seriously. But it also offers something that remains an undesirable to the columnist: close proximity to a complex and often highly intelligent audience that answers back. Like an actor trained for the proscenium arch, Martyn is clearly uncomfortable with the rougher, in-the-round format. Like a good pub a good blog should encourage (and protect) the diversity and richness of all human conversations that pass there. And, as far as possible, having had the first word, the patron should have the grace to allow his/her commenters to have the last Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Concerned Resident 1 Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 Australians are like yanks, the only thing they can't do is keep their big mouth shut , thats wot I now fer sure ! Re the Potters....they are a bunch of toe rags, knew some back in the 80's, thats wot I definatly no ! !inthebin! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sussexred 25 Posted August 10, 2008 Report Share Posted August 10, 2008 thats wot I definatly no ! I usually let spelling go by the by, but this is clearly one illiterate twat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
poohbear 1,360 Posted August 11, 2008 Report Share Posted August 11, 2008 I usually let spelling go by the by, but this is clearly one illiterate twat. Can't stand people who pussyfoot around and don't say what they're thinking.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Concerned Resident 1 Posted August 11, 2008 Report Share Posted August 11, 2008 ger at on it ! wot you gone to sussex fur ?, bleedin long range sniper thats wot I recon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.