Myleen Klass Warned By Police because........

[SAGPACK]

....she waved a knife about in her own kitchen! Not sure if this is a repost but what the heck is this country coming to.....

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-News/Myle...

[ShadownINja]

There's another thread on this!

Edited by ShadownINja on Sunday 10th January 10:40

[Rollcage]

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

[SAGPACK]

Rollcage said:

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

That's unclear...possibly disclosed info herself when speaking to Police? In any event, IMHO if the report is accurate and the 'teenagers' were outside her window late at night inside the perimeter of her garden then they (the teenagers) are the ones in the wrong and a householder (male or female) should have the right to defend themselves with whatever comes to hand.....poor woman must've been terrified.

[Eric Mc]

SAGPACK said:

Rollcage said:

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

That's unclear...possibly disclosed info herself when speaking to Police? In any event, IMHO if the report is accurate and the 'teenagers' were outside her window late at night inside the perimeter of her garden then they (the teenagers) are the ones in the wrong and a householder (male or female) should have the right to defend themselves with whatever comes to hand.....poor woman must've been terrified.

They don't.

[Mclovin]

whats she doing living in potters bar, she should move to hadleywood....

the government has got too much debt and the prisons are too full up to solve this matter.....only thing to do is for people to get private security as a deterrant...

[fadeaway]

Eric Mc said:

SAGPACK said:

Rollcage said:

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

That's unclear...possibly disclosed info herself when speaking to Police? In any event, IMHO if the report is accurate and the 'teenagers' were outside her window late at night inside the perimeter of her garden then they (the teenagers) are the ones in the wrong and a householder (male or female) should have the right to defend themselves with whatever comes to hand.....poor woman must've been terrified.

They don't.

Who don't Eric? As far as I can see the only issue is that they were in her garden, and not inside her house. Threatening people on your land might well be different. Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

[Somewhatfoolish]

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

[Northern Munkee]

fadeaway said:

Eric Mc said:

SAGPACK said:

Rollcage said:

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

That's unclear...possibly disclosed info herself when speaking to Police? In any event, IMHO if the report is accurate and the 'teenagers' were outside her window late at night inside the perimeter of her garden then they (the teenagers) are the ones in the wrong and a householder (male or female) should have the right to defend themselves with whatever comes to hand.....poor woman must've been terrified.

They don't.

Who don't Eric? As far as I can see the only issue is that they were in her garden, and not inside her house. Threatening people on your land might well be different. Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

Agreed, burglars breaking into your home, or are they child rapists or murderers, I can't tell, I'm not intending to discuss it with them, bleary eyed at 3 in the morning, as far as I'm concerned they've chosen to step outside of the rules community, and by choosing to ignore their responsibilities to the community, i.e. not to thieve from, rape or murder members of it, they, not I, have chosen to abdicate their rights in the community. And consequently I'll be swinging my bat, or chopping with whatever comes to hand, as hard as possible, at whatever is there until it is incapacitated or has left.

[mrmr96]

Northern Munkee said:

fadeaway said:

Eric Mc said:

SAGPACK said:

Rollcage said:

Best pick up a baseball bat next time then.

ETA - Was she reported by the scrotes, or did some jobsworth take it on themselves to warn her based on her own account?

Edited by Rollcage on Sunday 10th January 10:40

That's unclear...possibly disclosed info herself when speaking to Police? In any event, IMHO if the report is accurate and the 'teenagers' were outside her window late at night inside the perimeter of her garden then they (the teenagers) are the ones in the wrong and a householder (male or female) should have the right to defend themselves with whatever comes to hand.....poor woman must've been terrified.

They don't.

Who don't Eric? As far as I can see the only issue is that they were in her garden, and not inside her house. Threatening people on your land might well be different. Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

Agreed, burglars breaking into your home, or are they child rapists or murderers, I can't tell, I'm not intending to discuss it with them, bleary eyed at 3 in the morning, as far as I'm concerned they've chosen to step outside of the rules community, and by choosing to ignore their responsibilities to the community, i.e. not to thieve from, rape or murder members of it, they, not I, have chosen to abdicate their rights in the community. And consequently I'll be swinging my bat, or chopping with whatever comes to hand, as hard as possible, at whatever is there until it is incapacitated or has left.

Agreed. I would do whatever was neccessary to keep my family safe, but no more. (i.e. once they were safe, then stop. Try not to administer retribution at the time.)

We need more clear laws on this like the Americans have. Scrotes have enjoyed the leftie sponsored upper hand for too long.

[siscar]

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand. What is not legal is to go on the offensive, so if someone is running away and you chase them and beat them half to death with a cricket bat or if they are running away and you shoot them - that is what is illegal.

[mybrainhurts]

siscar said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand.

No it's not...

[mrmr96]

mybrainhurts said:

siscar said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand.

No it's not...

Both please offer some proof to back up your respective positions.

[hairykrishna]

It's perfectly legal to defend yourself using reasonable force. Self defence is a legal defence to all levels of assault in UK law. See Beckford v. R [1988].

Edited by hairykrishna on Sunday 10th January 13:19

[fadeaway]

mrmr96 said:

mybrainhurts said:

siscar said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand.

No it's not...

Both please offer some proof to back up your respective positions.

Happy to oblige. And siscar is absolutely right about the media stirring this up and trying to frighten people.

The Crown Prosecution Service said:

Anyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. You are not expected to make fine judgements over the level of force you use in the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you honestly and instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment, that would be the strongest evidence of you acting lawfully and in selfdefence. This is still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon.

As a general rule, the more extreme the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence.

and

The Crown Prosecution Service said:

If you have acted in reasonable self-defence, as described above, and the intruder dies you will still have acted lawfully. Indeed, there are several such cases where the householder has not been prosecuted.

Full statement can be found here. Spells out your rights very simply and clearly:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/Publications/prosecution/hou...


As it would be the CPS deciding whether to prosecute you or not, I think we can talk their word on this as being correct

Edited by fadeaway on Sunday 10th January 13:19

Edited by fadeaway on Sunday 10th January 13:20

[Parrot of Doom]

siscar said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand. What is not legal is to go on the offensive, so if someone is running away and you chase them and beat them half to death with a cricket bat or if they are running away and you shoot them - that is what is illegal.

On the other hand, if "whatever comes to hand" happens to be a baseball bat lying underneath your bed, you're going to be in very serious trouble.

[fadeaway]

Parrot of Doom said:

siscar said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

fadeaway said:

Defending yourself in your own home with whatever comes to hand is perfectly legal. And the consequences to the invaders don't matter.

No it isn't. It should be, but it isn't.

Actually it is perfectly legal. There is a lot of urban myth about this stirred up by the likes of the Daily Mail. If someone breaks into your house or otherwise attacks you it is perfectly legal to defend yourself with whatever comes to hand. What is not legal is to go on the offensive, so if someone is running away and you chase them and beat them half to death with a cricket bat or if they are running away and you shoot them - that is what is illegal.

On the other hand, if "whatever comes to hand" happens to be a baseball bat lying underneath your bed, you're going to be in very serious trouble.

No, you're not. You perfectly within your rights to keep something "to hand". It's different out side your home - because that shows you went equipped or with some intention. That doesn't apply at home.

[freecar]

Self defence is perfectly legal, you can kill them too it's fine!

However for something to be considered self defense you have to be:

a, in fear for your safety and life,

b, convinced that the only way to defend yourself is to attack the aggressor

c, still in fear for your safety if you continue to hit them when they are on the ground.

You are not allowed to chase after them, capture them and cave their heads in with a spade!
You must be protecting yourself within your property or wherever you were threatened. You also need to have a good reason for not escaping! (if you were able to!)

[Parrot of Doom]

You might think that—I disagree. I think that anyone keeping a weapon near their bed is going to have a very hard time justifying its use in a court. It demonstrates intent.

[becksW]

She reacted in instinct as I'm sure most of us would esp with a kid in the house. I am guessing she told the poilice as would I because I would not have realised that the action taken would be wrong.

My only guess is that she was told it was illegal in this case because they hadn't actually entered her house but in my opinion if they are on your property you have every right to scare them off.

Her adrenaline and fright mechanism must have leapt a hundred fold when she saw those faces peering in, I'm sure it would to most, grabbing a knife as she was in the kitchen would seem the most natural instinctive thing to do in my eyes and almost impossible not to do.