24hours in custody.

[Jameshow]

Anyone see it?

Shocking programme about two young career Crims who burgle and electricians house.

Who then chases them and knocks them off stolen motorbike and injures them.

He get 22months, having no previous.

They get suspended sentence due to injuries but where caught driving a slolen car soon afterwards!!

 

[Dag Hammar]

Yes, I’ve just watched the programme.
My heart went out to Adam and his wife when the writing on the screen informed me that he got 22 months whilst the two career criminals received suspended sentences.

 

[Beebo]

I watched it. The sentencing was a bit harsh. I expected him to get a suspended sentence too.
The main question to ask is what was he intending to do if and when he had caught them.
I doubt he was intending to have a little chat.
He made a poor decision as there was no longer any risk to his property.
Would I do the same thing? Who knows? But I hope I wouldn’t.

 

[tom73]

I watched it. The sentencing was a bit harsh. I expected him to get a suspended sentence too.
The main question to ask is what was he intending to do if and when he had caught them.
I doubt he was intending to have a little chat.
He made a poor decision as there was no longer any risk to his property.
Would I do the same thing? Who knows? But I hope I wouldn’t.

Yep that’s is the question what was he hoping for? The law is clear at the point of crash the threat to him and his family had past. The courts don’t like taking law into your hands cases. However hard this case maybe law has to be seen to be done.
What won’t have helped his case was the crash investigation report showing he did not slow down at any point. Or the injuries from it.

 

[Time Waster]

Yes quite. He acted beyond the point that they were a risk to him, his family and property. As such I believe it moves from protection to a form of vigilante action which was always going to put him at risk of losing out.

Didn't watch it but from what's been said I think the above is a fair assessment and tbh I think he got what he deserved too. No patience for vigilante types who go too far.

 

[cougie uk]

Ok I haven't seen it but I can only imagine what hormones would be flying round your body if you caught people in your house.
It's not like he planned to do that - he hadn't thought it through.
The crims had planned it out though.

Seems wrong to me.

 

[Accy cyclist]

On the local facebook page they often show home CCTV images of suspects involved in house, car, garages etc robberies. Many say things when someone identifies them like "Tell me where he lives, I'm gonna do him as the police will do f..k all". As much as I empathise with their thoughts, they are broadcasting their intentions and if they do carry them out, there is the evidence that'll end up in them getting a far stiffer sentence than the ones who committed the original crime.

 

[Stephenite]

I watched it. The sentencing was a bit harsh. I expected him to get a suspended sentence too.
The main question to ask is what was he intending to do if and when he had caught them.
I doubt he was intending to have a little chat.
He made a poor decision as there was no longer any risk to his property.
Would I do the same thing? Who knows? But I hope I wouldn’t.

I haven't watched it (I'm not sure how to not living in the UK). But you're 'main question of intent' seems wrong to me.

I've chased after thieves a few times in the past (in the UK). A couple of occasions come to mind - where i have caught up to them. One, as a countryside contractor, 2 guys had gotten into the works' van a few hundred yards away, I shouted and they ran, and I went after them. Ran across fields and eventually caught up to them. I was so out of breath I struggled to speak. They said they hadn't taken anything, and had just tried the door 'out of curiosity'. I was telling them it wasn't a good idea just as my mate came barrelling round the corner in the Landy scaring the sheet out of them - and they were off again. Another time, I was having a haircut and some scrotes came in and took the till. The staff were upset and quite at a loss and I went out after the thieves. Took the first one fairly quickly, grabbed him and shouted at him to stay put, which he did. And went after the rest - which, to cut it short, got away.

I think the first time i went after thieves was when i was 10. My brothers were 9 and 7. We were around our school in north Manchester and we saw 2 kids about my age passing stuff through a window at the school. We chased them off and I hopped in through the broken window, to what turned out to be the school office, and phoned the police.

Getting back to the point. There was possibly very little intent or forethought. Perhaps only a gut reaction to wrongdoing.

 

[Accy cyclist]

15 years ago I would confront a would be thief, vandal or burglar, but definitely not now. The other month a drunk driver was vandalising his own (parked up outside my flat while he went to the pub around the corner) car. Yes, he was that hammered he intended driving home and when his car wouldn't start he started booting it. My problem started when he looked at my car behind his! I phoned 999 and after a few questions and 5 minutes of waiting I heard the rare these days but welcoming sound of a police siren. He'd left by then, on foot not car I'm glad to say! The police took a photo' of his car and told me they'd have a word with the owner. I'm happy to say he hasn't been back since.

 

[steveindenmark]

I think everyone has sympathy for him and hoped the sentence was the other way round.

But he could potentially have killed them and society would have quietly cheered under their breath. But the laws of the land work differently until we get into the sorry state that the USA is in. In the cold light of day they all committed a crime and the court quite rightly thought his was serious enough to to sentence him.

 

[Time Waster]

I don't have sympathy. Intent? Just what do you think he has to chase after them like that? Intent was to stop them. He did it and caused injury. A criminal due to his actions. The crime being a form of assault. Aggravating circumstances were that he chased them when he could have let them go when it was clear they were no longer a threat to him.

Look at the crime. If he'd been chasing and they knocked him off a bike they'd be done for it why not him? It's the crime not the sob story.

 

[mustang1]

15 years ago I would confront a would be thief, vandal or burglar, but definitely not now. The other month a drunk driver was vandalising his own (parked up outside my flat while he went to the pub around the corner) car. Yes, he was that hammered he intended driving home and when his car wouldn't start he started booting it. My problem started when he looked at my car behind his! I phoned 999 and after a few questions and 5 minutes of waiting I heard the rare these days but welcoming sound of a police siren. He'd left by then, on foot not car I'm glad to say! The police took a photo' of his car and told me they'd have a word with the owner. I'm happy to say he hasn't been back since.

Like in Fawlty Towers when Basil's red Mini would not start!

 

[tom73]

I haven't watched it (I'm not sure how to not living in the UK). But you're 'main question of intent' seems wrong to me.

I've chased after thieves a few times in the past (in the UK). A couple of occasions come to mind - where i have caught up to them. One, as a countryside contractor, 2 guys had gotten into the works' van a few hundred yards away, I shouted and they ran, and I went after them. Ran across fields and eventually caught up to them. I was so out of breath I struggled to speak. They said they hadn't taken anything, and had just tried the door 'out of curiosity'. I was telling them it wasn't a good idea just as my mate came barrelling round the corner in the Landy scaring the sheet out of them - and they were off again. Another time, I was having a haircut and some scrotes came in and took the till. The staff were upset and quite at a loss and I went out after the thieves. Took the first one fairly quickly, grabbed him and shouted at him to stay put, which he did. And went after the rest - which, to cut it short, got away.

I think the first time i went after thieves was when i was 10. My brothers were 9 and 7. We were around our school in north Manchester and we saw 2 kids about my age passing stuff through a window at the school. We chased them off and I hopped in through the broken window, to what turned out to be the school office, and phoned the police.

Getting back to the point. There was possibly very little intent or forethought. Perhaps only a gut reaction to wrongdoing.

The theft was of a motorbike from a garage and not his house at no point did they get in or try to gain access to the house.
High speed car chasers in urban areas come with high stakes and he lost. Which is way the duty inspector can call off police in such situations. Seeing someone off your property is one thing but going after them in BMW at high speed is another.
His actions went past reasonable force. What's "reasonable" has long been tried and tested in court and is understood.
All the evidence will have been laid out in court before a jury and sentence passed by a judge based on the evidence. We either have laws and use them, allow courts to interpret and carry them out independently of the establishment. Or we end up with a total free for all.

 

[Brandane]

If only there was a number we could call that would result in an almost immediate response by local Police when scrotes were in the process of stealing our property....

However, we now have a decimated Police "service" (not supposed to call them a "force" these days) run from a distant call centre, who will take some details over the phone and give you a crime reference number for your insurance claim.

The lunatics have taken over the asylum, for sure. Hence why people are tempted to deal with matters in their own way.

 

[Beebo]

Remember that the thieves took nothing. They were disturbed and left.

In our imperfect world where burglaries exist, the best outcome is that the burglar gets disturbed and leaves with nothing.

Once that happens there is no need to go chasing after them with intent to cause significant harm. He was in a massive 4x4 and they were on a motorbike.

The two thieves refused to give statements against the driver. If you watched the programme you could see the police were somewhat emotionally conflicted. They knew the guy was a victim of circumstance, but the law is fairly clear.