Close Topic Options

Home Defender Gets Arrested - Page 2

You and I totally agree on this point. However, until the judicial system makes this judgement, then the guy who entered another man's house, should not be allowed to bring a lawsuit against him because he got bashed over the head. You simply do not barge into someone's house (whether there is a cause behind it or not), attack someone (verbally or physically), get attacked yourself, then sue that person for attacking you. That is what I have a problem with. If the courts believe the man whose house was broken into did not have reasonable cause to attack the man, then and only then, should that man be allowed to sue.

Arrested Defender Home

The intruder is not filing a lawsuit against anyone. He was in a serious but stable condition when this report was filed.

The guy who hit the intruder has been charged with assault by the police. In Australia, police are now compelled to charge people with crime if they see grounds for it. This is the proper course of action in this incident because we simply do not know what has happened. We are only getting one version of events from the guy who assaulted the "intruder". Until it goes before the courts we should not jump on media speculation.

Edited: arvhic on 2nd May, 2006 - 6:46am

Home Defender Gets Arrested History & Civil Business Politics

So is the intruder not being charged with anything? If so, then what is the reasoning for that? If anything, both men should be charged, not just the resident.

Page 2 Arrested Defender Home

Latest on intruder story

This is the latest report I have found on this incident. It says the man who assaulted the intruder was granted bail and is due to re-appear in court in June. The magistrate has said there appears to be grounds of self-defence.

As I have tried explaining, the police are obliged to charge someone with assault if there is evidence. There is quite obvious evidence that the man who smashed the intruder with a baseball bat assaulted him. There is probably no evidence that the intruder assaulted him prior, otherwise they would both be charged.

There is a difference between being charged with a crime and being convicted of a crime. Once someone is charged they go to court and have their case heard by a magistrate. He will then decide whether this man should be convicted. If the bloke being charged wants to lay counter-charges for assault or break and enter, then I am sure he is free to do this. Yet again, I would remind everyone that all the details we are hearing are coming from the POV of the man who assaulted the intruder. We don't know if his story is fact or what the real details are. The magistrate will work that out.