And what do we read in the 'Telegraph' scant hours later?
Mansell was out of prison on licence, after being released in March last year for a previous offence of grievous bodily harm. He had previous convictions for burglary of dwellings.Shocker, eh? And who thinks that fact wouldn't have been IMMEDIATELY available to the police?
And they are now washing their hands of the whole affair and passing the buck to the CPS, who are dropping it like the hot potato it is:
Judith Walker, Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS East Midlands said: “Andy and Tracey Ferrie were released on police bail yesterday (Tuesday 4 September 2012) after being questioned about the shooting in the early hours of Sunday morning at their home near Melton Mowbray.
“Earlier this afternoon, the head of the East Midlands Complex Casework Unit, Lawrence English, visited the scene of the incident to see for himself whether the accounts given by Mr and Mrs Ferrie were consistent with other evidence of what happened.
"Looking at the evidence, it is clear to me that Mr and Mrs Ferrie did what they believed was necessary to protect themselves, and their home, from intruders.
"As Crown Prosecutors we look at all cases on their merit and according to the evidence in the individual case. I am satisfied that this is a case where householders, faced with intruders in frightening circumstances, acted in reasonable self defence.
“The law is clear that anyone who acts in good faith, using reasonable force, doing what they honestly feel is necessary to protect, their families or their property, will not be prosecuted for such action.
“We have therefore advised Leicestershire Police that Mr and Mrs Ferrie should be released from their bail as they will not face any charges over what happened.”I'm sure that's a great comfort to them as they now face the uphill struggle of having to get their property (their gun) back, they will have to face awkward questions should they ever need a visa for the states (for an 'offence' that, as SAoT points out at 'Counting Cats' wouldn't even be a crime there) and they may face reprisals from the scumbags unless they really do move to Australia. And who could blame them?
Meanwhile, in the States, this old boy will probably be awarded the keys to the town. Which, by the way, is a town where, as a result, you really do need 'courage' to be a burglar, unlike East Cleveland... :/
22 comments:
Glad that they've been released from their bail, but they should never have been arrested in the first place.
Most countries actually perform an investigation before making an arrest. We need to see a change in the law where charges have to be brought as part of the arrest or within a specific time period after arrest.
Arresting people for questioning is just too damaging.
Isn't it time that an American style district attorney was introduced to the UK? In the US, such an incident would not have led to the couple being put under arrest until the DA is satisfied that there are charges to answer.
You seem to think that the police are anti people shooting scum.We aren't.More scum shot the better in my opinion.
However there will one day be a situation where a "burglar" will be shot by a householder illegally and the police won't arrest.Then you armchair warriors will be out in force.
In taking a broad view, I forego what pleasure is derived from stepping in soft fecula:
In future, we must strive to offer only simple words to those enjoying public service employment - the only practical method for embracing common understanding. We have already stuffed these services to the gunnels with stupid, bigoted and lazy individuals.
These folk, who would otherwise find no meaningful employment, have run us aground after acquiring highly paid and conflicting captaincies. Yet there is redemptive light at the end of this tunnel. In glorious pink neon; Lessons Will Be Learned.
Jaded, I pretty much always err on giving you the benefit of the doubt when you post on here, but in what way (Genuine question here) would a householder be illegally shooting 4 fuckos dressed in black wearing ski-masks, rifling (no pun intended) their house in the middle of the night?
Even if the said burglars were close friends and it was a sick joke that went wrong and they perceived a potential threat and blew their brains over the wall.
Yes there'd be much wringing of hands, the sorrow and the regret of "If only we'd known" etc.
In what way would the shooting be illegal?
As Joolz says, House holder has a record as pure as the driven snow, scumbags, record as long as your arm.
I'm usually supportive of Police, they have a job to do, don't always like it, but.
Investigate thoroughly by all means, but hauling them away in cuffs, processing them and locking them up before the investigation starts, smacks of politically motivated JBTism of the first order.
Budvar-I generally agree with most of your post but you missed my point.What if there are complications?
MTG-google translate needed again.I presume you mean every single person in public service is stupid lazy and bigoted? Have you met them all?
Dear householders (of which I am one) please shoot all the burglars you like.The burglary rate will plummet overnight.However you will almost certainly get arrested,and hopefully you will get off.
Jaded, Complications?
If you mean (As an example) Once it's been ascertained the shot alleged burglar happened to have been screwing blokes wife on the side, then yes hauling them off would have been appropriate in that particular case.
I don't think anyone is arguing the case should be left at "Serves the scumbags right, nothing to see here folks", without a thorough investigation.
There were no such "Complications" in this case or the last where householder went "Stabby" with the breadknife on 4 fuckos dressed in black with ski masks after having kicked his back door in.
To be fair to MTG, he never said "ALL" were a bunch of useless tossers, just that services were stuffed to the gunnels(sic) with the stupid, lazy and bigoted. You surely can't deny that current recruitment policy would seem to favour those of this ilk?
The box ticking culture that has taken hold in recruitment of form over function or boxes ticked over ability is clearly beyond denial.
The arrest...on suspicion of causing GBH...was made in the face of more than enough evidence to support that suspicion and so was absolutely justified.
No charge was brought for all the reasons given by those legally qualified to judge... justice was done and seen to be done... and so the only real problem here seems to be how the record of arrest will now affect their lives.
Therefore the focus should really be on fixing *that*.
The very last thing I'd do is expect or allow the police to make on-the-spot snap judgements regarding guilt or innocence. That's not their place and it never should be.
Tatty you are spot-on.Prepare for incoming.
Budvar-an investigation cannot be conducted in 5 minutes with a bleeding burglar on the kitchen floor.I told you earlier that I fully support householders fighting back.
I think Julias repeated posts on this subject means she takes the exact stand of "serves the scumbag right,nothing to see here folks".Hindsight is 20/20.Also don't speak up for MTG,he has enough chums at the asylum to do that for him.
Don't blame the police. The Human Rights Act doesn't differentiate between people based on previous convictions.
What if it turned out that it was over a drug debt and the shooter turned out to be Mr BIG? His loft full of cocaine.....oh that would be great...police miss something twice in the loft...that would be great!!
All about opinions...being equal before the eyes of the law. A criminal doesn't have previous until he is caught and convicted for the first time.
The really disappointing thing about this is that both shot burglars survived. I suspect the householders made the somewhat unwise choice to load their shotgun with birdshot. A better choice is 00 or 000 buckshot. Then chummy wouldn't have had his arm in a sling. He'd have had the stump of it in a bandage, if he were lucky.
Jaded: if a householder 'illegaly' shot a burglar then I highly doubt anyone here would be 'out in force'. Short of tying one one of the toerags to a stake and burning him to death, the precise means by which one of these scumbags gets his comeuppance is neither here nor there.
"But hauling them away in cuffs, processing them and locking them up before the investigation starts"
And not forgetting another couple of DNA records for the national database...
Futile gestures have now assumed a measure of desperation in attempts to explain something relatively simple to Jaded. God help us if this person is genuine plod.
anon @ 23:33
For unrelated reasons, I doubt WPC Jaded is genuine. IMHO, 24 carat pigshit between the ears is inconclusive evidence.
"Most countries actually perform an investigation before making an arrest. We need to see a change in the law where charges have to be brought as part of the arrest or within a specific time period after arrest."
Given we have no chance of changing the visa requirements of other countries, and the Home Office seems determined to resist EU rulings on DNA retention, that seems the best way forward.
Some sort of comeback for those arrested where there's considered to have been no grounds would concentrate minds on the front line too.
"However there will one day be a situation where a "burglar" will be shot by a householder illegally and the police won't arrest.Then you armchair warriors will be out in force."
I rather doubt it, actually.
"I don't think anyone is arguing the case should be left at "Serves the scumbags right, nothing to see here folks", without a thorough investigation."
You're right, they're not. So I can't see why Jaded feels the need to pretend we are?
"Therefore the focus should really be on fixing *that*."
As above, we have no control over other countries Visa requirements, and the only bit of EU legislation we seem capable of standing up to in this country is the one that says we shouldn't retain DNA!
So, there's no fixing that.
"What if it turned out that it was over a drug debt and the shooter turned out to be Mr BIG? His loft full of cocaine..."
Are we back to 'what ifs'? Let's deal with the case at hand, shall we?
"The really disappointing thing about this is that both shot burglars survived. "
Indeed :(
What if it turned out that it was over a drug debt and the shooter turned out to be Mr BIG?
Then I'm sure the police would rapidly discover that and be able to make an arrest. I'm also reasonably sure that Mr Big would not have rung the police himself, relying on the burglars' natural disinclination to mention exactly how they came to be injured, ff they attended hospital at all.
The point here is that the involvement of a gun seems to have made people go "eek!". I can understand that but it is not at all unusual for criminals to be injured during the course of their 'work'.
I'm betting it is more often caused by things like falls and sometimes car crashes. So re-cast it this way, as I've seen such accidents.
Man driving home is waiting to turn right. A car coming down the hill is driving strangely; he suddenly suspects that it is not so much out of control as aiming directly to clip him; it does so, spinning his car across the road and chucking it in to someone's front wall where the 19th century houses open directly on to the pavement.
The car which clips him is damaged but drives on, fast. It could, of course, have been a complete accident but it looks more like the occupants of the hot hatch have been playing car-pool.
As his wing is now embedded in someone's front room, the police are called by a frantic householder.
They find a shaken and baffled man telling a story of being hit either by accident or, it seems to him, deliberately. They breathalyse him - standard practice but a bit cheeky as they have no reason to suspect he has been drinking - but should they arrest him?
On the logic offered here, then he 'might' have been involved in any number of imaginative crimes. Perhaps there was no other car; we've only got his word for it until the investigators measure exactly where the dents are. Or perhaps he drove in to them, but they've gone so who knows?
Then there are the controversial sex attack cases. Should we arrest all complainants immediately, particularly the children, on the grounds that they might be making it up or are engaged in blackmail? How about if we arrest all parents who make a missing persons report about their children, on the grounds that it might be murder?
I fail to see how ringing the police and reporting one has defended one's self can, of itself, be grounds for arrest.
Even when there is a gun involved.
yeah but jaded as a bleedin sertificat an can ficks raydiater's wen their to hot.
i ment cold.not had me donuts yet
Anonymouslemming - We need to see a change in the law where charges have to be brought as part of the arrest or within a specific time period after arrest."
Julia - ...that seems the best way forward.
Wait, what ? Please, correct me if I am wrong but isn't that precisely what happens now ?
Julia - As above, we have no control over other countries Visa requirements
USA Visa Waiver Program - No.5. Traveller has never been arrested (even if the arrest did not lead to a conviction) and has not been convicted of a crime.
Given our (and their) Justice System's horrendous penchant for allowing criminals to be acquitted on the flimsiest of technicalities I can't blame them for that, frankly.
In cases like this though there really should be a system in place to de-arrest and wipe the record completely. We should be absolutely clamouring for that...for no other reason than it's the correct thing to do...instead of focusing on the one part of the process that doesn't need changing and that truthfully we'd all like to see a lot more of (arrests).
the only bit of EU legislation we seem capable of standing up to in this country is the one that says we shouldn't retain DNA!
Ah but as we all know the collection of DNA and fingerprints isn't entirely to do with dealing with crime so therein lies the rub.
That some children (mine included) must now submit fingerprints to read a book and obtain food...library facilities and free school meals...shows just how far it's gone.
Strangely enough it's only the single sex secondary schools for boys round here that have implemented this...so far...
@Tatty
Anonymouslemming - We need to see a change in the law where charges have to be brought as part of the arrest or within a specific time period after arrest."
Julia - ...that seems the best way forward.
Wait, what ? Please, correct me if I am wrong but isn't that precisely what happens now ?
No, it's not what happen now. Arrests are made almost immediately on report for many crimes. After initial questioning, the suspect is then bailed pending investigation. At this point, there is often extremely limited or even no evidence of a crime, let alone whether or not the arrestee should be charged with a crime.
Over a period of time, the police investigate the case and then present it to the CPS. The CPS then decide whether to bring charges or not. The whole time that this investigation is proceeding, the suspect is either in remand or bailed pending the investigation. This period of time can be weeks or even months.
Anonymouslemming - Arrr right thanks for that. What confused me is that there are actually 3 kinds of bail after an arrest...which I won't bore people with here...google is our friend. Live and learn eh.
Thing is though, I can understand what you're saying and can see how it might apply hypothetically in some cases but ...even with the benefit of hindsight...I cannot see how what you propose would have made a blind bit of difference in thiscase.
Except perhaps if he had been charged at point of arrest...and there was more than enough evidence to support a charge of GBH regardless of the reason he did it...then another layer of bureaucracy would have been necessary to then drop it just over 36 hours later.
No matter, it's all academic. I respect your opinion and thanks for an interesting discussion. :)
Post a Comment