Victim charged for assulting theif

[Joel_D]

A Taber farmer who smashed a suspected burglar in the face with a hatchet is facing assault charges. On May 29, a couple arrived at their home northwest of Taber to discover an unfamiliar vehicle parked in the driveway.

The 46-year-old homeowner parked behind the vehicle, trapping it, while he fetched a hatchet, RCMP said. The man searched the house and found no one inside but soon encountered a man in his 20s trying to escape in the blocked car.

Police said the homeowner struck the man twice with the blunt end of a hatchet, smashing his teeth and face. The injured suspect ran off but police tracked him down to his home. Police arrested two other men on a road near the house. All three were charged with breaking and entering.

Now, five months later, police have charged the homeowner with assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm. "Under the Criminal Code, people can use degrees of force when protecting property or a person, but there are limitations, especially if the courts determine it to be excessive force," said Sgt. Patrick Webb.

Joseph Bradley Singleton, 46, is charged with assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Farmer+charged+with+assault+after+hatchet+attack/3731735/story.html

As much as I love Canada, sometimes I think our laws are a little backwards. I always thought getting caught and possibly beaten by your victim is an occupational hazard for thieves.

:dunno:

[D'z Nutz]

If I was that farmer, my defense would be: How the hell could he possibly ID me? He had a fucking axe in his face!

[FraserB]

Pretty retarded. I guess your only option is to allow yourself to be victimized.

Good link Kloubek, its just missing the part where the person under arrest falls down the stairs or bumps himself on something when you catch him.

[Kloubek]

This is actually a good segway thread for a link I just finished reading:

http://www.nfa.ca/node/179

It's much too long to cut and paste here. But it outlines what a civilian is and is not allowed to do under such circumstances.

One thing I found interesting is shouting the simple words "You're under arrest" which seems to legally change the scenario quite substantially.

The reason this owner was charged is because he:
a) was stopping a FLEEING person... not a person in the act of a crime, and
b) didn't place the suspect under arrest

Now, for those who think "b" sounds funny - look into a citizen's arrest. Everyone - not just officers - have the legal right to arrest someone doing something criminal.

So in short, if faced with a situation like this, place the person under arrest. And if they resist, then you are authorized to use whatever force is required to subdue them. (At least, that is my understanding)

[89coupe]

He hasn't been charged yet, or should I say, he hasn't been found guilty yet.. I have a feeling he won't be either.

[civic_stylez]

Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident".

[Aleks]

How do you judge reasonable amout of force in a situation like this? If the hatchet was traveling a little slower while it smashed into the thief's head would he have been charged?

[max_boost]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident".

:werd: :drama:

[GTI CANADIAN]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident".


This.

[revelations]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident".

You are also liable for civil claims arising from any personal injury. This would basically make you pay for his dental and facial reconstruction work.

While I agree the laws are far too left in Canada, favouring the criminal, taking an axe to a person who is already fleeing the scene (attempting to) is beyond what is considered minimal force to defend ones property.

Now had the guy had a KNIFE in his hand.... :D

[Anomaly]

Farmer shouldn't have used the blunt end. Bury the body deep and report that a car was abandoned on your farm. Done and Done.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident".

While you will probably find much agreement on this forum with that kind of viewpoint (and probably agreement with the majority of the Canadian public), the courts would disagree with you.

While the police are stuck picking up the intruder's bloody chicklets, and he's getting dental work, then YOU'RE sitting in a cell for assault. If you're cool with that, then swing away.


Originally posted by revelations
Now had the guy had a KNIFE in his hand.... :D

...as in, after being beaten to a bloody pulp, one conveniently places a knife in the hand of the intruder? Yeah - that would probably get someone off being charged I figure...

[Joel_D]

Originally posted by Kloubek
So in short, if faced with a situation like this, place the person under arrest. And if they resist, then you are authorized to use whatever force is required to subdue them. (At least, that is my understanding)

Would it not then come down to your word against the thief in court, as the thief could claim he did not hear you, cause he was too busy fleeing the scene?

[ercchry]

Originally posted by FraserB
Pretty retarded. I guess your only option is to allow yourself to be victimized.


no body, no crime ;)

[revelations]

Originally posted by Kloubek
This is actually a good segway thread for a link I just finished reading:

http://www.nfa.ca/node/179

So in short, if faced with a situation like this, place the person under arrest. And if they resist, then you are authorized to use whatever force is required to subdue them. (At least, that is my understanding)

I'm not too up on the rights of citizens catching criminals in the act, but the police have to follow a "use of force" process .....otherwise you would see the CPS taking a baton to the head to every idiot who refuses to comply while in custody.

So you cant use "whatever" force you feel like using to subdue someone, it has to be appropriate to the situation.

[revelations]

Originally posted by Kloubek
...as in, after being beaten to a bloody pulp, one conveniently places a knife in the hand of the intruder? Yeah - that would probably get someone off being charged I figure...


You didnt hear that from me ;)

[freshprince1]

What utter bullshit. This infuriates me. Where are all these Canadians that think this is a good idea? I don't think there are as many out there as we think...so why do our courts still find ways to victimize the victim.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by Joel_D


Would it not then come down to your word against the thief in court, as the thief could claim he did not hear you, cause he was too busy fleeing the scene?

Sure he could claim that. But it isn't that far off from someone trying to outrun the cops, and claiming he didn't see the lights or hear the siren behind him.

I would suspect a large majority of the judges don't WANT to put someone in jail for defending their home. However, they are there to interpret and pass judgement on the laws. So if someone who's house is broken into and doesn't have a criminal record CLAIMS he told the suspect he was under arrest, I would guess his word will probably be accepted as the truth - generally spreaking.


Originally posted by revelations


I'm not too up on the rights of citizens catching criminals in the act, but the police have to follow a "use of force" process .....otherwise you would see the CPS taking a baton to the head to every idiot who refuses to comply while in custody.

So you cant use "whatever" force you feel like using to subdue someone, it has to be appropriate to the situation.

I agree and disagree with this.

Yes, the action has to be appropriate to the situation. You can't say someone was resisting and then chop off both of their arms. But on the other hand, I'm sure you've seen lots of video where a suspect is resisting police, and they DO hit them repeatedly... either with their limbs or a baton.

I would expect the same allowance would be in effect in the event of an arrest by a homeowner as well. You can beat the crap out of them - as long as it appears you required to do so to subdue them.

[whiskas]

Originally posted by revelations


I'm not too up on the rights of citizens catching criminals in the act, but the police have to follow a "use of force" process .....otherwise you would see the CPS taking a baton to the head to every idiot who refuses to comply while in custody.

So you cant use "whatever" force you feel like using to subdue someone, it has to be appropriate to the situation.

To add to that, police carry several tools that help subdue people who don't cooperate and even without those tools are trained in hand to hand.

A normal citizen doesn't have pepper spray, baton or taser available to them at all times, you take what you can get.

You can't blame the farmer for not tazing the criminal because even though that may have been the "appropriate" thing to do, it wasn't an option at the time.

The fact that the farmer used the flat end of the hatchet inside of burying it in the idiots head will definitely help his case though.

[adidas]

This isnt the first time i hear of such a bizarr situation. This has happened in the states as well.

[89s1]

Originally posted by whiskas
The fact that the farmer used the flat end of the hatchet inside of burying it in the idiots head will definitely help his case though.

This.

This farmers lawyer will be sure to mention that he was demonstrating a real concern for the well being of the theif by not using the sharpened side of the head.

[mx73someday]

If it were a cop instead who smashed a fleeing suspect in the face with the blunt side of a hatchet I imagine it would be considered excessive.

I believe in self-defense and defending one's property, but this sounds excessive to me based on the details from the story. If the farmer had any reasonable explanation that supported self-defense I would be quick to change my mind.

The retributive punishment that so many members hope to dole out in these kinds of situations is disturbing, it's uncivilized and it doesn't accomplish anything.

[DayGlow]

what's uncivilized is people breaking into your property and taking your stuff. I'd say it's a hazard of the thief's chosen profession.

I hope the farmer gets off. By the sounds of it he's a victim of his own honesty. I'm sure he felt threatened at the time and reacted out of self defense :wink

[civic_stylez]

Originally posted by Kloubek


While you will probably find much agreement on this forum with that kind of viewpoint (and probably agreement with the majority of the Canadian public), the courts would disagree with you.

While the police are stuck picking up the intruder's bloody chicklets, and he's getting dental work, then YOU'RE sitting in a cell for assault. If you're cool with that, then swing away.



...as in, after being beaten to a bloody pulp, one conveniently places a knife in the hand of the intruder? Yeah - that would probably get someone off being charged I figure...

I definitely see the point you are making here. But if there was someone in my house, how am I to know that he is a petty crackhead burglar or a psycho serial killer. I might be a redneck or a bad tempered irish hillbilly but im not going to sit there and try and decipher that. I run on a shoot first, as questions later mentality. In no way do i think that is the best mentality to have but its like a police officer.. if some ass clown comes running at them reaching for something, they are trained to react accordingly. If my home is dark and there is someone in my house, i am going to assume the worst and react accordingly as well. If i have to sit in a cell for X amount of time and know that my family is safe because of what i did, i can live with that. If i get murdered and my wife gets raped/ murdered because i didnt react.. well you get the point.

[Kloubek]

Hey, I'm with ya man. If I ever find someone in my house I'm going to royally fuck them up.... weapon or no weapon. I too would rather ensure my safety and the safety of my property before I am "concerned" over his well being and any consequences I might face in protecting myself.

With that said, we both need to realize the potential charges that might be laid as a result. So for me anyway, that means I would likely think twice about using a deadly weapon... at least to the head region.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Kloubek

With that said, we both need to realize the potential charges that might be laid as a result. So for me anyway, that means I would likely think twice about using a deadly weapon... at least to the head region.

Ahhh, I see where you are going with this. Chop off his leg with the hatchet! He doesn't get away, everyone is safe, badabing badaboom!

;)

[black13]

I hate stories like this because there never really is enough details to understand the situation. If the police is gonna release these reports they might as well release the statements from both side as well.

Who knows what happened, maybe the criminal showed some sign of attack and the farmer just reacted or if the farmer just got way too defensive and started to beat the criminal even though he was trying to hide.

[BigMass]

Castle doctrine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.


I’m not a violent person but my home is my castle and it’s my last vestige of retreat. If someone breaks into my home I will automatically assume my life and the life of my family is at risk no questions asked. (and yeah of course Canada doesn't have this law but i agree with it)

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Ahhh, I see where you are going with this. Chop off his leg with the hatchet! He doesn't get away, everyone is safe, badabing badaboom!

;)

Chop OFF? Not likely. But believe me - if someone breaks into my home they are lucky to leave without blood pouring out of them.

But at least they can take comfort in knowing they probably won't die.

Unless they fight back. ;)

[4lti]

Break into my house.
Get fucked up.
End of story.

Ill NEVER risk my families safety.
I dont have time to ask this guy what hes doing in my house. Hes already in my house illegally.

Its like a terrorist coming into Canada.
No ones gonna ask questions. This guys gonna get fucked up. As simple as that. I dont think anyones gonna wait to see if this guys got a bomb before the bust him.

Just because he was fleeing shouldnt mean hes free to go.
Canadas laws are so stupid when it comes to this shit.

[st184]

Originally posted by civic_stylez


I definitely see the point you are making here. But if there was someone in my house, how am I to know that he is a petty crackhead burglar or a psycho serial killer. I might be a redneck or a bad tempered irish hillbilly but im not going to sit there and try and decipher that. I run on a shoot first, as questions later mentality. In no way do i think that is the best mentality to have but its like a police officer.. if some ass clown comes running at them reaching for something, they are trained to react accordingly. If my home is dark and there is someone in my house, i am going to assume the worst and react accordingly as well. If i have to sit in a cell for X amount of time and know that my family is safe because of what i did, i can live with that. If i get murdered and my wife gets raped/ murdered because i didnt react.. well you get the point.
This x100, especially since you have just suffered personally from a break-in and understand how stressful it can be. The government needs to adopt the idea that "your home is your castle". Protecting criminals like this is just going to make breaking and entering a legitimate start to a life of crime for scumbags. Its easy to say that he was running away since he was stopped by and axe to the face but everyone is forgetting that he had friends out on the road. There were a total of three 20 year old (likely) males lurking around this property owner and his family. If he had not taken action and merely cowered in his house to wait for the cops that leaves him vulnerable for several minutes (hours) depending on how busy the RCMP is. We need to bring across to this scum that breaking into someones house can be a possibly fatal mistake, not that they will be protected by the government if anything happens to them physically. We live in a country that has such pussy namby pamby laws its absolutely infuriating. If i catch someone breaking into my house and I "assault" them ill take the charges and the dental bill. Why? Because its the right thing to do, regardless of how butt hurt the courts feel that one of their precious criminals needs some prosthetic teeth.

[Guillermo]

I'm amazed by how different the connotations are with the title of the thread, and the CBC headline, which was something like "RCMP investigates hatchet attack." If I hadn't read the article and this thread, I would think they are two completely different stories. It's kind of amazing how people with different perspectives can twist the same story.

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Originally posted by DayGlow
what's uncivilized is people breaking into your property and taking your stuff. I'd say it's a hazard of the thief's chosen profession.

I hope the farmer gets off. By the sounds of it he's a victim of his own honesty. I'm sure he felt threatened at the time and reacted out of self defense :wink


Why the wink? Who defines reasonable in these situations? Someone breaks into my home, I automatically assume that my life is in danger if I don't stop him. Anything less is foolish.

[cycosis]

Originally posted by mx73someday

The retributive punishment that so many members hope to dole out in these kinds of situations is disturbing, it's uncivilized and it doesn't accomplish anything.

I take it you have never had your property stolen or your property vandalized. Wait until it happens, and your opinion will change.

[AaronK]

I agree, he should be charged. 2 shots to the face with a blunt piece of steel is a bit much... Use your fists.

[D. Dub]

Originally posted by mx73someday

it's uncivilized and it doesn't accomplish anything.

Sure it does. It smashes a scumbag thief in the face with an ax :D

[Mitsu3000gt]

Welcome to Canada, where you are not allowed to defend your property without often facing severe consequences.

If you ever have to defend yourself with force, and you don't kill the intruder, you get sued and the thief will probably win.

If you kill the intruder, and there is evidence to suggest your life was in danger, you get no punishment.

How, though, does one know his life is in danger until it is too late? 99% of the time you don't. You don't know if that thief has a gun/knife in his coat or what. What makes sense, however, is for someone to assume their life is in danger if someone forces their way into my home. Not in Canada though - maybe he just wants a cup of tea!

So, IMO you're better off killing the SOB and claiming your life was in danger. You will probably receive far less punishment than if you attack the guy and he lives.

[syeve]

shoot, shovel and shut up.

[hrdkore]

sometimes i think it's better if you dont use the blunt side..you dont get any charges if you kill someone..self defense as well as taxpayers dont have to pay for disability.

[beyond_ban]

I don't know about you guys, but if i was in that farmers position the guy might have ended up worse. When someone fucks with my shit and i actually* get a chance to get some payback i go into beast mode.

* so many times shit has gotten stolen without ever knowing who has done it, imagine catching the fucker in the act?

[Cos]

My firearms instructor used this saying all the time when it came to questions regarding this exact situation.


I would rather be judged my 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of them

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Kloubek


While you will probably find much agreement on this forum with that kind of viewpoint (and probably agreement with the majority of the Canadian public), the courts would disagree with you.


if the majority of Canadians agree with such, then our employees (government / court) should abide.

Democracy my ass.

[texasnick]

That's a really shit deal for the farmer.

If I were a thief, knowing that the person I was robbing was legally entitled to beat the piss out of me, or even kill me, it would for sure deter me from going to certain houses.

If I were a thief, knowing that there was really nothing my victim could do to me without getting into more trouble than I am, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to take whatever I wanted, just to see what I can get away with.

IMO, if you're going to tresspass on someone's property, you had better be ready to deal with whatever they have to dish out.

[Kloubek]

While you would THINK that allowing people to protect their property would reduce such crimes, if you look in the States where people *ARE* allowed to defend themselves in such a manner, the crime rate is no lower. Same goes for things such as capital punishment for violent crimes.

(I'm in favour of both, regardless)

[beyond_ban]

^ That's just cause the US is more fucked up haha

[CUG]

Originally posted by beyond_ban
I don't know about you guys, but if i was in that farmers position the guy might have ended up worse. When someone fucks with my shit and i actually* get a chance to get some payback i go into beast mode.

* so many times shit has gotten stolen without ever knowing who has done it, imagine catching the fucker in the act? It wouldn't be the blunt side of an axe either.

Like what Dayglow said, the farmer was too honest with the cops. I wouldn't say a single fucking word to the police if I was in this situation. Then again, the shitbag thief wouldn't be in a position to tell their side of the story either.

[Ergo-Sun-Tzu]

Originally posted by Guillermo
I'm amazed by how different the connotations are with the title of the thread, and the CBC headline, which was something like "RCMP investigates hatchet attack." If I hadn't read the article and this thread, I would think they are two completely different stories. It's kind of amazing how people with different perspectives can twist the same story.

Wait did I get that right? CBC headline reads "RCMP investigates hatchet attack"...

Personally, the headline pretty much insinuates that the home owner is the criminal and the thief is the victim. But hell only in CBC.

[CUG]

Originally posted by Ergo-Sun-Tzu

Personally, the headline pretty much insinuates that the home owner is the criminal and the thief is the victim. But hell only in CBC. It actually doesn't mean that at all. It means the crown wanted more information on it, probably because the thieves tried to pursue charges.

Doesn't mean he was arrested OR charged. If he lawyered up, he won't even see the back of a cop car. These situations rely a lot on someone saying the wrong thing.

[Crymson]

Maybe it's time to bust this out again. It's long, but it's thorough and it outlines why, even if you're the most honest, law abiding citizen in the world, NEVER SAY ANYTHING TO THE POLICE.

6wXkI4t7nuc

[atgilchrist]

Reminds me of the Texas case a few years ago where a guy killed two guys who were robbing his neighbours house.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy

[broken_legs]

Originally posted by Crymson
Maybe it's time to bust this out again. It's long, but it's thorough and it outlines why, even if you're the most honest, law abiding citizen in the world, NEVER SAY ANYTHING TO THE POLICE.

6wXkI4t7nuc


Good Video. Thanks for posting it :thumbsup:

[BMDUBS]

This is absolute Bull Shit! That idiot in this thread that goes on about this kind of action being uncivilized and accomplishes nothing is a fucking bleeding heart Liberal Douche Bag! How about it sets a precedence for deterrence? A few stories all over the news how a home owner killed a burgurlar in defense and gets off scot free would go a long way in deterring this kind of crime.

I have actually faced a Burgular face to face in my house before. The intruder was bigger than me but it did not stop me from chasing this guy out of my house in a rage! I didnt think what could happen to me, weopns or him overpowering me. I just reacted. You dont have time to think. You just react. In these situations there is no civility, it is the survival of the fittest. Think about it. The perp does not want to get caught and will do anything to get away including fucking you up!? So I look at it as its either him or I that gets fucked up?

Fuck this you're under arrest shit. It will never happen in the heat of the moment. I am all for the Castle law as posted above where you can take any force you deem nesassary to protect your possesions, property and family.

Stories like this make me hate the way this countries legal systems is so screwed up. It works for the criminals

[95teetee]

Originally posted by civic_stylez
Id take the charge.. if i caught the fuckers that broke into my garage and i had a bat, their dentist would have alot of work ahead of them. To me, once you enter someones property/home, you have waived your right to be respected and treated in a human manor. You dont break into someones home by "accident". I remember an episode of 'To Protect and Serve (our version of Cops) where this guy broke into an apartment, and the guy who lived there beat him with a 2x4 and took him up on the roof to wait for the cops (and hit the guy occasionally lol). When the cops show up the 'victim' gives his sob story about how the guy was beating him with a 2x4. Cop says "well, i guess you picked the wrong place to break into, didn't ya!" as he throws him in the squad car.

[mx73someday]

Originally posted by BMDUBS
This is absolute Bull Shit! That idiot in this thread that goes on about this kind of action being uncivilized and accomplishes nothing is a fucking bleeding heart Liberal Douche Bag!

You fail at reading comprehension.

[Cos]

Originally posted by 95teetee
I remember an episode of 'To Protect and Serve (our version of Cops) where this guy broke into an apartment, and the guy who lived there beat him with a 2x4 and took him up on the roof to wait for the cops (and hit the guy occasionally lol). When the cops show up the 'victim' gives his sob story about how the guy was beating him with a 2x4. Cop says "well, i guess you picked the wrong place to break into, didn't ya!" as he throws him in the squad car.

I think that is probably more to the truth on a typical day. I dont think very many people are actually convicted of defending their home.

Yes buddy is out smashing mailboxes and a 12 gage in the face may not be appropriate, regardless that he was on your property or not. However buddy is in your basement where you gun safe is? Sure as shit I would shoot him.