Thread: Justice?

Originally Posted by shooter74743

Bruno is dead on with that one, there has been quite a bit of study on that one. The classic "fight or flight" reflex that's down in our brain along with other "involuntary" functions.

ok but how does this factor in as far as guilt or innocence of breaking the law?

I don't know the laws there where he is from & won't even try to act like i do, however my opinion is that the law is WRONG. This man should be patted on the back and acknowledged as a hometown hero IMO. It is in a man's nature (and many animals) to protect their family, this is no different. Here in the US, (well, most states anyway) a crook knows that they are gambling with their LIFE if they break into a home when the family is home...IMO, it should be that way EVERYWHERE. Guns, knives, bats, or hands aren't even the issue. This particular law gives the crooks more rights than a honest & hard working person. Just imagine if you were in this man's shoes...what would you do? I would have done the same if in his country, here, the crooks would have not left the house and the coroner would have given them their next ride. I can live with that & with a clear consience (sp?) & knowing that I would/will have to answer to this when my time comes at the Pearly Gates.

I still think that people are misinterpreting on what basis this man was charged. He was not charged for using excessive force to protect his family or home.

He was charged for what was effectively the revenge, his family was safe, his home was safe. If he had done this the next day, or a week tomorrow, he would have gone down for GBH. If he had tracked this lad down and shot him dead a week later in the street in the states, he would have gone down for what? A crime of passion? Third degree murder?

Originally Posted by gregs656

He was charged for what was effectively the revenge, his family was safe, his home was safe.

Well, that would be what's under question

At what point is the attack over? Just because an attacker is running away doesn't mean he's done

Finishing the fight during the fight is different than revenge

A week later...it would be murder one probably here in the States. I have mixed emotions on that one.
-If they just broke in and stole things, no reason to track them down a week later.
-Raped my wife or daughter, I'd never give up on wanting revenge...would probably end up in prison if I couldn't hide the body well enough...

That's just me...

In my view justice was served until the so called "justice system" became involved.

Threaten me and run away, threaten my wife and children and you may run, but you can't hide.

We refer to this reaction as "Momma bear overdrive".

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

ok but how does this factor in as far as guilt or innocence of breaking the law?

It should mean that the court allows for the fact that it was an extremely stressful and frightening situation where the mans family was threatened, and that rational thought had likely gone out the window.

Surely trying to rob a mans home and tying up and threatening his family is counted as provocation and mitigating circumstances? And the guy didnt know if the crooks were going to regroup and come back either.

Sure, if he'd gone out, tracked the guy down and beaten him up days later that would be one thing. But in the heat of a moment like this, its not hard to understand how he reacted. Hell, I'd have reacted the same way. And frankly I'd rather go to prison than see anyone I love hurt.

Originally Posted by Stubear

It should mean that the court allows for the fact that it was an extremely stressful and frightening situation where the mans family was threatened, and that rational thought had likely gone out the window.

In Belgium, you can be cleared of murder by proving reasonable cause of temporary insanity. This would be a slam dunk.

A couple of years ago there was a case of a jeweler being robbed for the nth time. When he was robbed again, he shot one of the fleeing robbers in the back and killed him (if I recall correctly). He got cleared as well.

Our law foresees that there can be circumstances in which you can break the law but not be punished for it.

Originally Posted by Bruno

In Belgium, you can be cleared of murder by proving reasonable cause of temporary insanity. This would be a slam dunk.
.

So does ours. Apparently, he either didn't plea temporary insanity or the jury decided he wasn't.

I don't know how long after the attack it's considered revenge, in this case, probably because of the extreme retaliation, it wasn't very long.