Viewing Thread:
"Tony Martin can be sued by his burglar"

Crazy. You break into someone's house, knowingly, and with the intention of stealing their property. You deliberately break the law. Somehow during this you get hurt. So you can sue the owner of the house - not just if they themselves hurt you in self defense, but even if you hurt yourself on an object in their house. This, to me, is stupid for the following reasons:

1) You've already knowingly broken the law and committed a crime against them. This should nullify (possibly depending on the severity of what the owner does) anything they do.

2) What people put in their house or on their property is their own business. It's ridiculous that someone can't put on object on their land because if someone tries to break in they might injure themselves on it.

3) It could start a string of burglaries that have the sole purpose of getting the burglar injured. All you need to do is break a window, then hurt yourself on something in the house and it's quids in.

In my view house owners should be able to put as many things between themselves and burglars as possible - even, for instance, a trap that would break the law should it be set off. Because it would only happen in the event of the burglar breaking the law. And yet if such an event did happen, the burglar could sue the individual to high heaven while getting off scott free - it seems the judicial system conveniently forgets what the criminal did to provoke the action in the first place.

There would have to be some punishment for the owner if they went as far as to main, torture or kill the criminal, but I think prison is a bit harsh. Fines, maybe, community service, I don't know. Probably not community service because that's given to out and out criminals, and I don't think people who defend their home can be classed as such.

This whole issue annoys me. How long is it until Claims Diect cash in?

"Been in an accident during a bungled burglary in the last three years? Yes? Well this is your chacne to capitalise and make even more money from your hapless victim. Our team of no holds barred ruthless fresh out of training school solicitors will make the owner pay for buying a house in that position! It was clearly their fault all along! They should have put easy-shatter windows in, and not the messy sort that cuts you.

Take Mr Scum, he tried to parachute through his neighbours skylight - we got him £22 000! Or Mrs Fecklessidiot, when her tunnel collapsed after trying to dig under her victim's house, we got her £40 000! Or even Mr Benefitfraud, when the brick he threw bounced off the window and hit him in the jaw, we got him £5000, plus a new jaw! Remember, where there's blaim, there's a claim!"

The laws in this country are just too much in favour of the criminal. It's not right. If they want to have it this way they should make crime legal. That would sort out a lot of problems, but they would have to find a way around the whole contradictory element there.

Anyway, this was going to be a short post and it seems pretty long looking up from way down the bottom here, so I'll leave it there.

I'm not entirely behind Tony Martin in this whole case (I think there's a difference between defending yourself and your home and shooting a 15yr old kid in the back with a shotgun when he's scrambling out your window) but this is an absolute joke. However, it's worth remembering, he has only won the right to sue, he's not won any legal court case of any kind. Frankly I think he'll be lucky if it happens at all.

People complain about immigrants and foreigners all the time, but it's the people like this we need to get rid of: pikey, no-good chancers who'd happily ruin someone's elses life for a quick buck. Probably to buy another gas cannister or put their kids in Reeboks for another term. Grrrr.

I agree with all of you on this one. If someone broke into my house I would feel no remorse for him. I would use whatever I could to beat him to a pulp. If it puts him into a vegetative state that his fault. If someone is on your property without permission they are yours to deal with however you wish, not only would this deter burglers, but would also serve the selfish b**tards right. I would feel no pity filling a burglar full of lead. Don't forget why they have entered your property, they want to take your goods, which you have payed for with your hard earned money. Make 'em suffer, that'll teach the creeps. I think if you're going to take action as drastic as this, which I probably wouldn't (but think it should be legal in some cases) although I don't agree that Tony Martin should have shot the intruder, he had his back turned and was not threatening. If someone has a gun or knife and has threatened you, that's different.






Mr. No shoes

I know a guy who works in a prison. When we used to get yobs hanging around outside our house regularly, he said to my Dad "If you lose your rag with them and end up hitting them, they came at you with a big stick". I found it pretty funny.

WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> I already have my plan.
>
> Anyone breaks in here will be met with as much force as I can throw at
> them. Then, assuming they are incapacitated, I'll get the biggest
> damn blade I can find in our kitchen drawer and stick it in their
> hand.
>
> Then just tell the police, "He came at me with that. Self
> defence."

me, I'm old fashioned, I'd beat em until they didn't move anymore, then keep beating them until I was tired.

then roll them in a carpet and throw them off a cliff!!!

I already have my plan.

Anyone breaks in here will be met with as much force as I can throw at them. Then, assuming they are incapacitated, I'll get the biggest damn blade I can find in our kitchen drawer and stick it in their hand.

Then just tell the police, "He came at me with that. Self defence."

Agreed.

How it *should* be viewed is that the moment you violate someone's property, you automatically forfeit any and all rights, including legal aid and the right to sue. This is the BAD side of the Human Rights bill. Human Rights issues have gone absolutely insane.

This layabout is suing because he reckons he can no longer work, yes?

Like he ever planned to do a day's work in his life! If he was interested in working, he wouldn't have been breaking into people's houses to steal things in the first place.

And he doesn't look terribly disabled when you see him walking into court, does he? It's not like he's crippled or wheelchair-bound. People with far greater disabilities than his manage to do a job.

There's no reason he couldn't do a desk job - other than perhaps the fact that he's probably too damn stupid.

I hope anyone involved in trying this case throws it out as the joke it is. The only trouble is that it's going to cost taxpayers money.

In my opinion home owners should be MADE to have Indiana Jones-style traps to protect their homes. I'm talking rolling boulders, spike pits, the lot.

cookie monster wrote:
> I saw this on AOL news when i logged on, its totally wrong.
>
> I mean a guy coming into your house to steal your stuff, in the old
> days clubbing the burglar on back of the head would have seemed
> trivial. Justice has gone mad.

If I was martin, I'd have stopped to reload, then pumped a further 2 rounds into those scummy little gits. a mans house is his own private property, if you break in, you should not expect to get any mercy at all.

god it winds me up.

I saw this on AOL news when i logged on, its totally wrong.

I mean a guy coming into your house to steal your stuff, in the old days clubbing the burglar on back of the head would have seemed trivial. Justice has gone mad.

this whole topic makes me sick.

I think tony martin should start his own vigilante group. I'll sign up, just show me where the gypo scum are and I'll help you mister martin.