murder/manslaughter/self defence.

[cockercas]

A family freind has been convicted of manslaughter.

Im abit confused and cant work out the reason why ( except to look like they have done something).

Basicly a 3 people drove from doncaster to melton, not a short drive, best part of a hour trip. With them they took a knife, axe and machette.

Knocked on petes door and had abit of a argument.

Petes shut the door and then his wife went out ( 2 of the guys were her brother and nephew).

They started at his wife so petes gone back out and the nephew stabbed him twice in the neck and the brother started ramming the house with his transit van.

Petes gone into the house and come back out and shot the nephew twice, both in the chest/leg (facing him) with a sawn off shotgun.

He holds a shotgun licence, theres limits on the lenght of barrel. Possibly not like a movie sawn off. I cant find this out.

Police come and arrest all.

Hes just had his trial. Aqquited of murder but convicted of manslaughter. Surely if you have been stabbed twice in the neck your in fear of your/others life? And shoud walk free on self defence.

Surely he should be only up for firearms offence.

Anyone got a idea on the manslaughter charge?

[Guest]

just read the news reports.. and according to that. he shot the wrong man. it was the 15yr old son who stabbed him. but the father who was killed. he shot him in the leg and 'back' - the fact he shot him in the back is a definite no-no. that means he was not a threat!!

he also had 5 firearms offences against him.

The jury rejected his plea of self defence and without being at the trial.. its pointless speculating. I imagine this will now go to appeal and it will be for that court to look into all the circumstances and decide finally on whether the jury reached the right conclusion.

[cockercas]

I was originaly told 2 in the gut.

Everything ive seen in the news was one in tge gut and one in the leg.

You got a link?

As for it been the wrong guy.

Theres 3 of them and you think your going to die. You make sure you wifes going to live you take out whoevers closest. They didnt bring a axe to help chop wood.

[Guest]

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Melton-s ... story.html

and..

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Murder-a ... story.html

But again.. without being at the trial itself.. its pointless speculating. those news reports are in themselves pretty shoddy.

But.. if the fatal wound was caused by a shot to the back.. and particularly if as those reports say he was sitting in his truck. then its cut and dried. the jury found him guilty of manslaughter.. thats not murder. he didn't wake up that morning intending to kill someone.. but he did kill someone. and it appears by shooting him in the back after disabling him with shots to the leg. thats pretty much beyond the pale.. especially if the reports are true and the dead man wasn't the one who actually stabbed him.

[cockercas]

That clears that up then.

Its always said never shoot anyone in the back. There no threat then.

[Fozzie]

Yikes

That 15 year old found out what trying to prove yourself can back fire and do

Seems to me this guy convicted either shot the dad because he just had it in for him, or wasn't going to kill a kid but wanted to make a point.

Either way... Seems a bit of an escalation. If you can't solve things with words, don't solve them at all, just walk away.

[cockercas]

He did walk away. Then they started crashing into stuff with a van.

He should of shot them with a legal gun.

He got 14 years. He needed to answer to 5 firearms charges and a firearms charge is 5 years minimum.

He is a really nice bloke. He used to let me ride in the jcb's at tip as a young kid lol.

If you needed money he would give you it.

If you broke down ingront of his house he would get you home.

Such a waste of life.

The law is backwards though. I know he needed to answer the firearms charges but you should be able to defend yourself from attack.

It dosnt say what made up the 14years though.

[rob m]

He is a really nice bloke.

 

A nice bloke that went into his house, grabbed a shotgun and shot his wife's relative twice. He's clearly a danger to society and I'm thankful that he's locked up. Shame it wasn't longer.

[Joe85]

Tony Martin was aquitted of manslaughter after shooting and killing an unarmed burglar, fleeing through a window, in the back.

Your mate will probably get off on an appeal or get his sentence reduced. There has to be a lot of factors for self defence. Who were these guys? Did they just randomly attack his house? Where they relatives? Does he have former criminal convictions? Any of them violent or to do with firearms?

Plenty of factors decide the sentence a judge gives, but the verdict is passed by a jury which means there must have been overwhelming evidence of some kind that made it not self defence or atleast in the simplest form.

[Guest]

Tony Martin was aquitted of manslaughter after shooting and killing an unarmed burglar, fleeing through a window, in the back.

no he wasn't. he was convicted of murder. which was then reduced to manslaughter on grounds of 'diminished responsibility' and spent 3 years in prison. And now lives in fear of his life.

 

There has to be a lot of factors for self defence.

 

you can't argue self defence when you have shot a man in the back who is busily damaging your property. self defence doesn't apply to damaging vehicles.

thankfully most people don't have access to guns.. so, for most people the automatic reaction is to run into the house and call the police.

This man knew he had done the wrong thing.. as he was lead away he remarked that he'll never see his house again, as its turned out he'll see it again in 2018.

As for the dead man.. he's gone. did he deserve to die? I doubt it.. what he deserved was arrest for at the very least: Criminal damage and driving over the limit a big fine and a victim surcharge plus a lost diving license.

the 15yr old.. GBH. or actual bodily harm.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Anonymous

[cockercas]

No criminal convictions, held a shotgun cert.

What would you do if you had been stabbed in the neck and thorght you was going to die?

Id do the same as he did and make sure my wife would be safe.

[cockercas]

It wasnt random. The dead guys daughter had been visiting her nan during the day. The dead guy didnt like it.

I think its in the link above.

[Joeman]

... its a whole different world up north!!

[Guest]

What would you do if you had been stabbed in the neck and thorght you was going to die?

.

 

Run in the house... lock yourself in and call the police.

not.. run in the house, grab a gun and then shoot the wrong person in the back.

[cockercas]

Youve been stabbed twice in the neck, you not sure if your going to live or die. There ramming stuff outside. Its not going to take them long to bust the door down is it.

Theres no chance your going to take the risk of your wife been stabbed aswell.

[maccy]

With a bunch of armed guys outside with your wife and one of them just stabbed you. They are now clearly trying to break in. You would just phone the police, sit on the sofa and wait 20 mins for them to turn up, What a load of bollocks. In my opinion, he shouldnt have any illegal guns so should be charged for that. But he was justified in using them, as in this situation he would be fearing for his own and his wifes safety.

[Joeman]

Get upstairs point the gun down out of the window and fire a couple of warning shots into the van to make them realise the weapon is loaded and to alert the neighbours who will all get on the phone to report a shooting.

Shooting them in the back is not self defence.

And if you get carried away in "the heat of the moment" then you're probably not the right type of person to keep guns in the house in the first place.

Shoot someone in the back = go to prison

Any other result would made a joke of the legal system.

[Fozzie]

Compromise!

You have a shotgun,

You've just been stabbed in the neck,

You are inside and they are ramming the house, and will knock down the front door to get you.

So do both of the above, call the police asking for an armed response.

Tell them you will now guard your home with said shotgun.

Pull up a chair in front of the front door, aim shotgun at the door, and wait.

If the police get there first, brilliant.

If the armed assailants get in first, and ignore your warnings, open fire.

A shot to the leg would have been more survivable though. And maybe have a warning shot before hand.

Sounds like the guy shot to kill one of the times he fired so manslaughter is fitting.

Psycho is a word I might not use, but they often appear nice people on the outside.

[fq-craigus]

Tough to make a judgement here, as to be fair he had been stabbed inthe neck, that alone is enough to make most people panic and act rash. Sounds like a mucky situation and he is now paying the price. Shame we dont know the history of the fued.

Like said before in the back.... He is lucky to get manslaughter. Our laws and system is to tight on the wordings that it tries to make everything black or white and unfortunatly the grey areas are the ones that get judged and rounded up or down

[maccy]

I think a mixture of adrenaline and fear you're going to bleed to death would cloud your judgment when devising a scheme to scare them away.

[Joeman]

I think a mixture of adrenaline and fear you're going to bleed to death would cloud your judgment when devising a scheme to scare them away.

And that will likely be that basis of his appeal case.

If the stab wound to the neck was life threatening and the blood loss was sufficient to cloud his judgement, he may have a strong case for appeal. But shooting them in the back would suggest they saw the gun and turned to run away, which will be used by the prosecution to throw out the appeal.

[Guest]

But shooting them in the back would suggest they saw the gun and turned to run away, which will be used by the prosecution to throw out the appeal.

 

According to the news reports - the dead man was sitting in his vehicle. when he was shot. sitting in his vehicle with the 15yr old as passenger - busily causing criminal damage by repeatedly reversing his truck into one of the shooters cars. The physical attack was over and done. The shooter himself wasn't being threatened. He went back into his bungalow. came out with a shotgun and used it.

[Joeman]

But shooting them in the back would suggest they saw the gun and turned to run away, which will be used by the prosecution to throw out the appeal.

 

According to the news reports - the dead man was sitting in his vehicle. when he was shot. sitting in his vehicle with the 15yr old as passenger - busily causing criminal damage by repeatedly reversing his truck into one of the shooters cars. The physical attack was over and done. The shooter himself wasn't being threatened. He went back into his bungalow. came out with a shotgun and used it.

 

So a case of RAGE taking over a man with a gun.... He'll stay locked away for a while longer

Going back to my comment above. people who cant control their temper are the wrong people to have guns in the house.

[Fozzie]

He can argue he felt an attempt on his life had been made, the adrenaline kicked in, in a state of panic and remembers he has a shotgun.

But in reality it sounds like he had a "time for some disproportionate retaliation" moment in the fray there.

I know it says he was stabbed, but we don't know how badly he was stabbed.

Clearly he was able to get a shot gun, take out one of the men, and then get arrested before being treated so it sounds like he wasn't hit with a life threatening injury.

I would dare say he saw an opportunity, they are attacking him and his property, he has an excuse, and a shotgun. Putting those together in those circumstances sort of suggests to me the verdict was fair.

I'm guessing that's what the court decided with all the facts laid out in front of them.

[Guest]

I know it says he was stabbed, but we don't know how badly he was stabbed.

 

 

The best information on that was from the news reports on the day of the shooting. it said.. 3 men were arrested and one was treated for 'none life threatening injuries'.