BoarSpear

DR IAN STEPHEN

THE murder of John Monckton and the attack on his wife, Homeyra, during an apparent burglary in their London home has once again highlighted the true dangers and indeed the legal and moral dilemma members of the public face when they are confronted with intruders on their own property.

From a police perspective, the advice to potential victims of burglaries is unequivocal and clear-cut and you should never "have a go", so to speak, but for the victims of crime this is a very difficult thing to put into practice, especially when your natural instincts are to defend yourself, your family and your own property - the very pillars of your life that are being violated and potentially destroyed by criminals.

As a law-abiding individual confronted by an intruder in your home you face a catch-22. If you attack the burglar, or react in an "over the top" manner, as was recently illustrated in the case of Tony Martin who shot intruders in his Norfolk farmhouse, you will inevitably end up on the receiving end of a prison sentence that will far outstrip that imposed on the intruder in your own home. This situation has resulted in a lack of belief in the law among the public or rather a belief that the law isn’t exactly on your side when your home is broken into.

To this end it is perhaps important not to dwell on the situation involving Mr Martin because, regardless of the appeal procedure he successfully went through to secure his freedom, in many ways the law still points to his particular attack on the intruders who entered his home as a pre-meditated assault. He had previously been the victim of a number of burglaries within his home and as a result of this he was effectively prepared for further intrusion and reacted as such when his farmhouse was broken into again.

But what the Martin case does reflect is the general fear felt by the public over rising crime rates and the extent to which they will go to protect themselves. As the case involving Mr and Mrs Monckton shows those most at risk from aggravated burglary are the wealthy, individuals identified by criminals as prosperous professionals. However, at the other end of the scale, people living in inner cities and on council estates face a similar level of risk.

When individuals are confronted by intruders there are some actions they should follow. Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible. If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity. In most cases the best form of defence is always avoidance. If this isn’t possible, act passively, be careful what you say or do and give up valuables without a struggle. This allows the victim to take charge of the situation, without the intruder’s awareness, through subtle and non-confrontational means. People can cooperate but initiate nothing. By doing nothing there is no chance of inadvertently initiating violence by saying something such as "Please don’t hurt me".

In a situation involving housebreaking it is also important to remember that many common burglars are adolescents, most likely starting out on the first rung of the criminal ladder, and they are therefore prone to lashing out if confronted and in the worst case scenarios killing out of panic and fear.

Sometimes the perpetrator of a burglary is even more terrified than the victim and in many cases when things go wrong it is the perpetrator of the crime who panics. Although they sometimes go equipped with weapons, in most cases they probably don’t intend to use them but in the heat of the moment, and the fear of either getting caught or attacked themselves, they use them. They don’t expect the person they are trying to hold up to retaliate or react. Mostly the knife is there simply for intimidation rather than intent to use it and they finish up killing somebody by accident rather than design.

This, of course, does not excuse their actions, but it is certainly worth taking on-board when you consider confronting an intruder. While saying this, in my own experience counselling victims of crime in recent years, there has also recently been a marked increase in the use or the threatened use of dangerous weapons in burglaries and common assaults. This, in itself, is a deeply worrying trend and, although not entirely excusing over-retaliation from homeowners, creates an understandable degree of sympathy for members of the public who lash out at intruders in their home. In truth it is an incredibly difficult situation to assess.

What is perhaps most important is dealing with the victims of the crime and helping them through the aftermath. As someone with wide experience of counselling the victims of violent robberies in their homes it is essential to remember the post-traumatic stress associated with such incidents.

The truth is aggravated burglary causes enormous stress as the victim’s home has been violated. This situation is magnified when the victims and their family have been threatened or assaulted and can lead to a whole range of post-traumatic stress disorders. Like the victims of rape and violent assault, members of the public who experience criminal intrusion in their home experience episodes and often show all the classic symptoms of post-traumatic stress like panic attacks, sleep disorders, flashbacks and social withdrawal.

Like other serious crimes the aftermath of a burglary can be the start of a process that continues to destroy the victim’s self-esteem and even relationships with their loved ones and more often than not reinforces their feelings of guilt and self-blame over the situation. The damage to the victim from the original crime can also be magnified by the court experience and, more likely in today’s society, the lack of support from local authorities and the police.

The trauma can be dealt with in a number of ways with professional help, counselling to develop effective coping strategies and taking time off from stressful professional activities. People who fail to seek help often develop further psychological problems. Men especially are not good at accepting support, but some simple counselling immediately after an attack can substantially reduce the risk of long-term psychological problems.

• Dr Ian Stephen is an Honorary Lecturer (Forensic Psychology) at Glasgow Caledonian University and has worked in a number of prisons with long-term prisoners and young offenders. He was a consultant to forensic psychology television series Cracker.

...............................

This is an amazing look at the thought process of the U.K.s government, and people wonder why they're called subjects not citizens. I highlighted the worst advice in red if you dont waant to read the whole article.

Hardball

If I am home it's not a burglary-Its a Home invasion. It's also a state by state call. Federal law does not apply. It reverts back to the old bumper sticker--" I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6". Find me a good lawyer and now. Another bumper sticker--" Insured by Smith and Wesson" One more I got from the pet shop; Never mind dog beware of owner.

__________________
The Way of the Warrior is Practice. Daily practice, accumulate practice minute by minute, hour by hour and day by day. {Book of 5 Rings} Mike Brewers 2008 Sit up challenge 44,000/100,000 running balance.(Crunches) Kicks 6,300/100,000

BoarSpear

Damn skippy...first I'll sweat surviving the physical threat, then I'll get a lawyer to help with the legal threats that arrive after the fact. IF they ever do...the scum that broke into my home didn't call the cops after I fought them off.

Tom Yum

.......Nice.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

kingoftheforest

Yep, there is no getting out of death on paroll.

__________________
The actions one takes are answered by consequences waiting at their conclusion. There are no exceptions.

http://destructionscreation.deviantart.com/gallery/

The_Judo_Jibboo

what a load! it's not your intended victim's fault if they react violently to your threats on their lives. "taking on-board" the possibility that the threat might be empty sounds like a fabulous way to get stabbed or shot and watch the same happen to loved ones.
i'm all for mercy, and if events unfold in such a way that you can safely subdue an intruder, great. but breaking into someone's house is tantamount to threatening their lives. they don't know your intentions and it is unreasonable to expect them to try to find those intentions out. the threat has to be eliminated and my family will get the benefit of the doubt long before some scumbag.

man, sorry guys, no one even disagrees and i'm going on a rant, this crap just gets me worked up.

__________________
"When the enemy comes, welcome him. When he goes, send him on his way."


So the real message here is that in a SD situation you should always take off your trousers...
-jubaji

BoarSpear

Getting worked up is aside effect to paying attention these days.

The_Judo_Jibboo

sigh, amen to that boar

__________________
"When the enemy comes, welcome him. When he goes, send him on his way."


So the real message here is that in a SD situation you should always take off your trousers...
-jubaji

Uke

Hahahaha....

__________________
A solar panel 100 miles by 100 miles (161x161km) in the Mojave Desert (USA) could replace all the coal now burned to generate electricity in the entire U.S.

dogzilla

I dont know what ur laws are good. But in slovenia i dont think if someone gets in ur home and u beat him up, you wont go in jail and even less you wotn find ur self in cort. I mean its your propety and noone cant go on it whitout your permission. If u kill him thats other thing, but beating up counts like "holding" him until police arrives.

Hows up in america, you cant even touch him?

__________________
R.I.P my dear MOTHER (1965-2004)

Martial arts history:

Past: 8 years of Judo
Present: Taekwondo

Tant01

yeah buddy! It's a sad day when the criminal has more rights than the victim.


I have a better story for you guys...


**** ****

SAN JOSE, Costa Rica (AP) - An American senior citizen killed an alleged mugger with his bare hands, and his traveling companions aboard a tour bus fended off two other assailants in the Atlantic coast city of Limon, police said.

A retired member of the U.S. military aged about 70 put suspect Warner Segura in a head lock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus, Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose, said Thursday. Segura was later declared dead, apparently from asphyxiation.

The two other men fled when the 12 senior citizens started defending themselves during the Wednesday attack. Afterward, the tourists drove Segura to the Red Cross where he was declared dead. The Red Cross also treated one of the tourists for an anxiety attack, Hernandez said.

The tourists left on their Carnival cruise ship after the incident and Hernandez said authorities do not plan to press any charges against them. "They were in their right to defend themselves after being held up," he said. Hernandez said Segura had previous charges against him for assaults.


****


****

I like HAPPY stories Boar! Pass this one along!

__________________

"In all countries where personal freedom is valued, however much each individual may rely on legal redress, the right of each to carry arms - and these the best and the sharpest - for his own protection in case of extremity, is a right of nature indelible and irrepressible, and the more it is sought to be repressed the more it will recur."

James Paterson

Garland

Tresspassers will be eaten.

__________________
homo homini lupus

Thai Bri

It is perfectly legal to have weapons in your house in the UK (even firearms, if you have the appropriate certificates). It is also perfectly legal to defend yourselves and your families in the UK, especially if they are in your home!

A couple of years a go there was a big uproar in the UK press about this issue. They reported how you could end up in court for defending yourself. When asked for evidence of this actually happening, the arguments lost all impetus. Why? Because in 15 years they could only find 11 (eleven, that's less than 1 per year!) examples of where this MAY have happened.

And, guess what? These so called examples of "self defence" where totally flawed, including one example of a guy disabling an attacker (who happened to be in his own criminal gang), and then setting fire to him whilst he was helpess.... And Tony Martin? He had illegally held firearms, and lay in wait for someone to come to his home (which, of course, they shouldn't do). He then shot a 16 year old in the back.

But such is life. If people want to believe that you "cannot" defend yourself in the UK, that is up to them. But, if you live in the UK, don't listen to these idiots. because it is certainly better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 and, of course, you almost certainly won't even be judged by 12 anyway.

Why? BECAUSE YOU CAN DEFEND YOURSELF IN THE UK! PEOPLE DO IT EVERY DAY, BUT IT DOESN'T GET IN THE PAPERS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EVEN GET TO COURT!

WildWest.

This is a common issue we have in NZ too....the right to self defence. Too often however we have good people dragged though the court system, only to be found not guilty, after defending themselves and/or their families. It disgraceful that they have to go to court in the first place and face the massive financial/mental burden this places on them.
Unfortunately we have a political party called the "Greens" who have a say in parliament who are a bunch of namby pamby, left wing, hippie, tree hugging poofters who like to tell us that we shouldn't defend ourselves, cops shouldn't have tasers and that criminals are only people who are "misunderstood".

It makes my blood boil!!!!

__________________
"Too much weights, not enough speed work"

Albert

Get the chainsaw.