Rights of victims defending their property from intruders to be strengthened
Guidance to police over whether to arrest homeowners to be changed
Homeowners who fight to defend their property will have the full backing of the law for the first time.
Not the first time ever, but certainly as far as the reporter's memory goes back.
In an historic move, Justice Secretary Ken Clarke yesterday announced a major strengthening of the rights of victims standing up to intruders in their property. It means anyone who reacts 'instinctively' to defend their home and possessions will be protected if they use reasonable force.
The current law says they can act only if they feared for their life or those of their family. It also places duty on victims to retreat from an attacker if they are acting in self-defence. This will also be scrapped.
At the same time, the Home Office is set to change guidance for police on whether to arrest someone who has attacked an intruder in their home. It could mean arrests are not necessary when householders and businessmen say they have acted in self-defence.
Mr Clarke said: 'While fleeing is usually the safest option if you feel threatened, people are not obliged to retreat when defending themselves or their homes. We will ensure that if you do react instinctively to repel an intruder you will not be punished for it -- as long as you used reasonable force. People should feel safe in their communities and especially in their own homes and these measures will ensure they are protected.'
A string of cases in recent years have fuelled public outrage at the law and led to demands for a change. They include that of Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer who rubbed out a burglar, Munir Hussain, who chased and beat a man who held his family at knifepoint.
Before the election, the Tories pledged to strengthen the law on homeowner protection.
Yesterday, the Ministry of Justice published amendments to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill. MPs will vote on the measures next week and the Bill could become law before Christmas.
Tory MP Priti Patel said: 'This is a long overdue reform to give power back to the victims of burglary and other personal crimes. It will send a clear message to criminals who break in to people's homes that the law is on the side of the homeowner.'
A string of court judgments led to demands 'reasonable force' be changed to allow anything that was not 'grossly unreasonable'.
Criminologist Dr David Green, director of the Civitas think-tank, said the law was 'not quite there yet' but endorsed the move as a 'step in the right direction.'
He added: 'Previously, reasonable force was uncontroversial but it started to be interpreted in a way that meant you had a high chance of being tossed in the clink if you fought back in the way any self-respecting person would. If someone is in your house, especially at night, then you should be able to disable them until the police come. If they get severely injured or even killed in the process, then that's the way it is.'
Mr Hussain, a millionaire businessman, was ambushed by masked robbers at his family home in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire. They forced him and his family to lie on the floor and threatened to kill them. But he and his brother were placed in durance vile for attacking and injuring a criminal who they chased down the street.
The case went to the Court of Appeal where the Lord Chief Justice ruled Mr Hussain should have been given a suspended sentence. Prime Minister David Cameron ... has stated that he is certainly a big Thatcher fan, but I don't know whether that makes me a Thatcherite, which means he's not. Since he is not deeply ideological he lacks core principles and is easily led. He has been described as certainly not a Pitt, Elder or Younger, but he does wear a nice suit so maybe he's Beau Brummel ... said the law will 'put beyond doubt that homeowners and small shopkeepers who use reasonable force to defend themselves or their properties will not be prosecuted.'
In other law changes, squatters will face a jail sentence of up to six months and a fine of £5,000.
For the first time squatting will be a criminal offence, as ministers aim to end the misery faced by homeowners who find strangers occupying their property. 'Far too many people endure the misery, expense and incredible hassle of removing squatters from their property,' Mr Clarke said. 'Hard-working homeowners need and deserve a justice system where their rights come first.'
And fees paid to middle men and blamed for huge increases in insurance premiums will be scrapped.
Insurance companies regularly sell details of their clients to no-win, no-fee lawyers for thousands of pounds. Lawyers then bombard victims with calls, urging them to claim.
Mr Clarke said: 'Our ban on referral fees together with our changes to no-win, no-fee arrangements will reduce legal costs and speculative suing, so businesses, schools and individuals can be less fearful of unnecessary claims encouraged by those looking for profit rather than justice.'
Continued on Page 47
#4
@Eohippus: "Reasonable force" is an element of self-defense law here in the U.S., too. Isn't normally an issue.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/28/2011 8:27 Comments ||
Top||
#5
With draconian British laws against gun ownership, what exactly are you supposed to protect yourself with? If you have a knife and the crook has a gun - retreat would seem the prudent course. Britain really needs the equivalent of the second amendment.
"Reasonable force" is an element of self-defense law here in the U.S., too. Isn't normally an issue.
Because USUALLY it's assumed that someone in your home without your permission intends to commit a violent crime against you.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
10/28/2011 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Reasonable force is a fine standard for out in the streets but if the intruder came onto your property the standard should be until you feel safe. If that requires reloading, so be it.
#11
At any rate, it's an improvement over the old Labour-era standard. See, there's at least a button's worth of difference between the parties in Britain!
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/28/2011 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Many years ago, homeowner self defense against burglars and robbers was actually an issue in Arizona. And so, when a new district attorney was elected in Maricopa County, the local media asked him what somebody should do if a burglar or robber broke into their home.
"You shoot the S.O.B.", he replied, in an unabbreviated fashion. That just ended the local debate right there.
It's pretty much been a satisfactory solution for these many years.
#13
..cause the DA understood that outside of blue areas of the United States, getting a jury to convict is usually a waste of limited resources. Consider it one of the key 'Bill of Rights' protections that the founding fathers made sure was in the Constitution. See 6th Amendment.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
David Cameron
