Posted on 11/04/2005 9:04:48 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
Intruder killer won't be charged
November 03, 2005
A MAN who killed a home invader with the intruder's samurai sword, in an apparent act of self defence, is unlikely to be charged, police say.
Two intruders, armed with the sword and a gun, allegedly tied up and assaulted the man and another person at a house in Melbourne's south-east early yesterday, and demanded money.
But the male occupant of the Noble Park Melbourne home, aged in his 30s, grabbed the sword and killed his attacker, police said.
Police believe the man was defending himself inside his home, Detective Stephen McIntyre said.
The man who died in the failed burglary was a 23-year-old of no fixed address.
At the request of his family, his name would not be released, police said today.
The alleged second intruder, a 19-year-old man from Narre Warren, is in the custody of the Office of Corrections, and police say they will have to wait several days to interview him.
They said a warrant of imprisonment was executed on him for an unrelated matter and he was receiving treatment at a secure ward of St Vincent's Hospital.
Police spokeswoman Sheree Argento said police would make an application at a later date to interview the man.
"The application is not expected to be made for several days," she said.
Pulp Fiction?
In Australia you can't release the name of a criminal? Criminals have a right to privacy even as they prey on the public?
Good deduction there.
"Step aside, Butch"
Out to be pretty easy now to get a fix on him.
Hopefully he took a yokomen strike and got a plitting headache!
Why did they even have to take time to think about this?
in an apparent act of self defence,
The homeowneer may well have run out onto the street, grabbed two passersby, dragged them into his house, forced a gun into one man's hand and killed the other with a sword. We have to keep open minds on these things. We can't be distracted by facts and stuff.
he should have killed the other perp too.
I give him an A-
Innocent until proven guilty.
Until a man has been found guilty in a court of law, he is entitled to the presumption of innocence and so he is entitled to have his identity protected to a reasonable extent.
As this man is deceased, he will never be found guilty. And so as far as the law is concerned, he remains innocent.
His name could be released if it was believed there was a public interest reason why it should be released. In this case it appears to have been decided there's no gain from naming him.
I'm actually reasonably sure I know who he is - I live in the same area, and I've seen a funeral notice for a fairly well known local petty crim. His family, as far as I know, are law abiding upright citizens. He's a black sheep. And I suspect that's the reason why his name isn't being released - because they don't deserve this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.