Government lawyers say burglars 'need protection' [in Britain]

The Independent (UK) ^ | 05 May 2003 | By Robert Verkaik, Legal Affairs Correspondent

[aculeus]

Government lawyers trying to keep the Norfolk farmer Tony Martin behind bars will tell a High Court judge tomorrow that burglars are members of the public who must be protected from violent householders.

The case could help hundreds of criminals bring claims for damages for injury suffered while committing offences.

In legal papers seen by The Independent, Home Office lawyers dispute Mr Martin's contention that he poses no risk to the public because he only represents a threat to burglars and other criminals who trespass on his property.

They say: "The suggestion ... that the Parole Board was not required to assess the risk posed by Mr Martin to future burglars or intruders (on the grounds that they do not form part of the public at large) is remarkable."

"It cannot possibly be suggested that members of the public cease to be so whilst committing criminal offences, and whilst society naturally condemns, and punishes such persons judicially, it can not possibly condone their (unlawful) murder or injury."

A recent report by the Law Commission, which advises ministers on proposed changes to the law, argued that judges had been too willing to reject criminals' claims for damages. The commission insisted that "even a criminal who has committed a serious offence" must be allowed to exercise their civil rights. In recent years, the courts have accepted a number of arguments to defeat actions brought by criminals on the basis of the principle that "crime should not pay".

Legal experts say the case for treating criminals as ordinary litigants will have been boosted by the arguments raised by the Home Office lawyers in Martin's case.

But Oliver Letwin, the shadow Home Secretary, said the rights of the victim needed to be addressed. "There certainly seems to be an imbalance [between the householder and burglar] made clear by the fact that burglars can sue for damage done to them in the course of committing a crime. We've put forward an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill which would rebalance the law in the appropriate way."

Norman Brennan, a serving police officer and the director of the Victims of Crime Trust, said that, by committing crime, burglars gave up "any rights". He added: "The public in this country are sick and tired of all these organisations pandering to the offender. Burglary is a despicable offence." He said: "sensible and reasonable" members of the public knew that, when criminal committed crime, they were putting themselves at risk.

Martin, 59, wants the court to order the Parole Board to reconsider its decision that he is not a suitable prisoner for early release. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering 16-year-old Fred Barras at his Norfolk farmhouse, Bleak House, in August 1999 but his conviction was later reduced to manslaughter by the Court of Appeal when he was given a five-year prison sentence.

A second burglar shot by Martin, Brendan Fearon, was granted legal aid to sue him for damages. Fearon's claim was thrown out by Nottingham County Court last month.

Martin's barristers, Bitu Bhalla and Tony Baldry, of One Essex Court chambers in London, will tell the judge tomorrow that their client's application "concerns the liberty of the citizen which is a matter of paramount concern in English law". They will tell Mr Justice Kay that the Parole Board failed to acknowledge the true extent of Martin's remorse or properly consider the risk he posed to the public.

In Martin's application for judicial review, his lawyers argue: "The risk that has to be assessed in Mr Martin's case is any risk of the use of excessive force when he is either burgled or attacked in his home."

Martin's solicitor, James Saunders, says that this risk is significantly diminished since he no longer owns a gun and has agreed to fit an air-raid siren to his home that "could be heard all over the Fens".

The court will decide tomorrow whether to grant Martin a full review hearing. He is due for release at the end of July.

[StarfireIV]

There is a kind of amusing irony in this. It reminds me of "The World Turned Upside Down", the title of the piece of music the British military band played while they surrendered their arms to the victorious Americans.

[MEG33]

The death of commonsense?

[steplock]

I learned THIS today! Thanks Freepers for the education!

In 1919 an Italian socialist named Antonio Gramsci began to publish a newspaper in Milan called, L'Ordine Nuovo, or "The New Order." Loosely rendered, he concluded that the average person would never voluntarily reject the faith and culture of the West. He concluded that the best way to implement a collectivist government was to use an intellectual elite to destroy traditional values by attacking fundamental Jewish and Christian beliefs.

...C. Gradual revolution through infiltration & subversion by revolutionaries
......1. Infiltrate the State: elective & appointed office; judgeships
......2. Infiltrate the military: enlist & subvert from within
......3. Infiltrate justice: undermine and discredit state constitutions
......4. Infiltrate education: professors & administrators
......5. Infiltrate & discredit religion: scoundrels as clergymen
......6. Register, then license, then confiscate all privately held weapons

http://www.gohotsprings.com/focus/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=434&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

[Mulder]

Not a day goes by that I'm not thankful that George Washington and Andy Jackson kicked these worthless turds out of America.

[sackofcatfood]

I would counter-sue for the price of the ammo and any collateral damage to the property.

And let's not forget about psychological damages!

[Slings and Arrows]

Dear G-d.

[joesnuffy]

Gramsci....was the Clinton's mentor..Billy stylized himself after

[joesnuffy]

this is what happens when man thinks his rights are derived from Kings (or the state) rather than from God Himself..
Self defense and protection of both his property and life as well as his spouse and children and his neighbor's as well...

[joesnuffy]

burglarize Windsor castle or a member of the royals house and see what happens...and if anyone gets arrested for shooting your sorry butt

[Prodigal Son]

I fret over this a lot. We own a house in the Borders region of Scotland and have a flat in Glasgow (in that traitor Galloway's district as a matter of fact). Where we live in the Borders is basically like Mayberry RFD so we don't really worry about it but Glasgow is a different banana all together. Lots of junkies who need to support their habit. Don't know what I'm supposed to do if one of 'em comes breaking in the door...

I'm a foreigner here. Don't want to spend twenty years in UK jail because I beat a burglar to death with my wife's reflex hammer (that thingy the doctor taps your knees with)...

[Wilhelm Tell]

This is the ultimate result of the idea that one has no rights, only entitlements, and if one refuses to work then one is entitled to anything one wants at the expense of society. With that philosophy, why wouldn't a thief be entitled to take anything he wants? And why wouldn't it be a crime for the victim to thwart the thief's desires? Things such as thievery are still nominally against the law because the socialists want the state to act as a middleman on behalf of the thief -- call it professional courtesy. That is why people we used to call criminals -- thieves, robbers, even rapists and murders -- are excused (sometimes praised) by the left while people defending themselves from criminal attack are met with the full fury of a jealous state.

[1066AD]

Don't know what I'm supposed to do if one of 'em comes breaking in the door...
Install the Mother of All Doors otherwise it seems you should welcome them and then call the cops once they leave ! I read while over there last November that the majority of burglaries now occur when householders are at home - the burglars know there's not much likely to happen. Pitiful but true. Fight 'em and you'll get sued or even prosecuted.

[zeugma]

Personally, I think that after killing that thief, he'll probably have few problems with them in the future....

[Jay D. Dyson]

Take a good, long and hard look, people. This is what the Left has in store for us: a world in which the criminals have more rights than the law-abiding.

Small wonder: most criminals would vote Democrat (if they were allowed to vote).

These idiots had best keep their lunacy in check. One day the People are going to decide they've had enough and will rise up against this nonsense.

God help those Leftists when that time comes...for no-one else will.

-Jay

[gaspar]

They have the same sort of problem in Mexico. There, company lawyers say kill the intruder (never injure him), but make sure you dump the body away from your house. And, never call the police. It's called anarchy, but it is the modus operandi in that country, and it seems to work.