Curry house owner foils burglary... and then HE'S thrown in cell when yobs complain

Daily Mail ^ | 6:09 PM on 12th March 2010 | Tom Kelly

[Niuhuru]

A restaurant owner yesterday branded the justice system a 'joke' after he was locked up for seizing two teenage yobs who broke into his beer cellar. Sal Miah spent five hours in a police cell after he chased down the hoodies and held them in the bar while his staff dialled 999.

The married father-of-five assumed police would commend him for catching the young criminals.

[Pontiac]

'But when I reported that the police said they couldn't find him.'

They probably tracked him to the edge of the Muslim neighbor hood and stopped.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

You would expect to read stuff like this in Alice in Wonderland!

[Slings and Arrows]

Where’s Cromwell when we need him?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

This is not uncommon in the UK and Europe. You see, the restaurant owner is also guilty of having more property than the thieves. He could even be held more responsible since his supply of beer “lured” these punks into breaking in. Five years in irons ought to teach him...

[UCFRoadWarrior]

Seems too many value criminal rights over victims rights.

Its a trend coming to the US....note the recent push to end the Death Penalty in many US states....all in the guise of a few innocents being wrongly convicted (instead of fixing the justice system....liberals instead reward criminals)

[Niuhuru]

Pity he didn’t think to lace a couple of beers with cyanide and then leave them out for the yobs to steal. Once the yobs are dead it’s not like anyone would care about them anyway.

[a fool in paradise]

all in the guise of a few innocents being wrongly convicted

I don't see these names though, just a scare story "what if".

There have been dozens in recent years who were sentenced to life in prison without parole only to die there and later be proven innocent of the charges.

The REAL solution is to end prosecutorial abuse. A workforce who run the courts for employment and revenue rather than justice.

Some prosecutors/judges seek higher office and want to come out as being "tough on crime" clearing murder and rape cases off the books even when the evidence doesn't support conviction.

The standard of conviction in a criminal case is the preponderance of evidence. It is a much higher standard than civil court where you only need 51% of the evidence to point to being guilty.

[arthurus]

Criminals in Britain are a “protected minority.”

[CA Conservative]

The standard of conviction in a criminal case is the preponderance of evidence. It is a much higher standard than civil court where you only need 51% of the evidence to point to being guilty.

Actually, the "preponderance of evidence" standard is used for civil cases, not criminal. The standard for criminal cases is "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".

[a fool in paradise]

Thanks for the correction of terms. You’re right.