Walid Salem and Munir Hussain

[ciphergoth]

Just to follow up on what I was saying to people yesterday:

Salem suffered brain damage and fractures, including a skull fracture, during the attack.

[...]

Judge John Reddihough said it was “ironic” that the attack had left their victim unfit to plead for his knife attack, sparing him a “very long” period in jail. Salem was given a two-year supervision order.

[...]

A neighbour urged them to stop and said Salem would be killed, he said. But they continued “like a pack of animals” and it was “fortuitous” he did not die, Judge Reddihough said.

He said: “You involved yourselves in a terribly violent and unnecessary assault on Waled Salem which amounted to a revenge attack.”

--Munir Hussain and brother Tokeer convicted over Desborough Park Road, High Wycombe GBH attack, Bucks Free Press, 2009-12-15

As far as I can tell, it was strictly speaking illegal for them to arm themselves, give chase and attack the guy when they caught him, but it's hard to imagine anyone pursuing them for that. It was the continued vicious assault after they'd already brought the guy to a halt that led to jail sentences.

Update: Thanks to autopope for linking to this below. What sort of society praises vigilantes with cricket bats?, Catherine Bennett, Observer, Sunday 20 December 2009

(Postscript re another conversation: Blu-Ray 3D will require special displays and there's a list of suitable displays here)

Comments

[autopope.livejournal.com]

Dead right.

Going after a guy who's just burgled your house, holding him down, and calling the police: that's good citizenship.

Going after a guy who's just burgled your house, holding him down, and attempting to murder him: going just that little bit off the rails of the community policing script. And lying to the police afterwards? Doesn't look good, does it?

[skibbley.livejournal.com]

That's my reading of that news.

[lizw.livejournal.com]

Giving chase would have been legal - since he was guilty of burglary and was trying to abscond, they were entitled to arrest him under s.24A PACE. Arming themselves and attacking him were illegal, as you say. The Wikipedia account is broadly accurate (except that the phrase "without doubt" is not in the statute, but in terms of the practical effect it's approximately correct.)

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Indeed. A tediously large number of people who subscribe to the notion that An Englishman's Home Is His Castle seem to think that principle applies out the door, down the path and half-way along the street.

Since they were found guilty of Section 18 GBH with Intent, a sentence of 4 to 10 years would normally be indicated, depending on the severity of the injury. That the two defendants got 30 and 39 months indicates the amount of mitigation that has been applied.

[xquiq.livejournal.com]

Yes, while I would expect a bit of leeway for trauma etc., it seems quite clear that this was far over and above what is acceptable.

As others have commented, clearly an amount of mitigation has been applied in sentencing.

[djpsyche.livejournal.com]

I agree with that. If they had attacked the robbers while they were still in the house, thereby scaring them off, then that's pretty much the definition of self-defense. This was revenge.