Clear message on the right to self-defence
We very much welcome the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service to take no further action against Andy and Tracey Ferrie. As has been widely reported in this newspaper and elsewhere over the past few days, the couple were arrested following an incident at their home near Melton in which two suspected burglars suffered shotgun wounds. Mr Ferrie told police he had fired a legally-held shotgun after a group of men entered the property at about 12.30am on Sunday. The case has reignited the debate about the rights of homeowners in such circumstances.
Yesterday, the Crown Prosecution Service issued a statement announcing that the couple will not face charges and giving a detailed explanation for the decision. Judith Walker, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said: "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."
It is essential that the law upholds the rights of householders to protect themselves, and that means not prosecuting people who are faced with a sudden and terrifying situation and have to decide how to react in a matter of moments.
We are not suggesting that anything goes and there must clearly be a balance between self-protection and the degree of force used.
ENJOY YOUR EVE WITH FREE ENTRANCE & 20% OFF YOUR FOOD BILL WITH...
Leicester's ONLY Lebanese Cuisine - Cedars Bar & Restaurant 46/48 Church Gate Leicester LE1 4AJ
View detailsNEW LEBANESE HOME BUFFET EVERY DAY @ CEDARS LEBANESE REST £ 6.99 pp STARTING @ 11 AM TILL 16:00 PM
Terms: LIMITED VOUCHERS AVAILABLE BOOK IN ADVANCE ONLY & PRINT THIS VOUCHERS CALL NOW : 01162519057
Contact: 0116 2169184
Valid until: Saturday, May 25 2013
It is also right that each incident of this nature should be investigated and dealt with on a case by case basis according to the circumstances. However, the law should, in our opinion, be firmly weighed in favour of the householder.
There has been considerable debate about this topic in recent years and public concern that decisions have swung in the wrong direction.
So, we are very pleased with the ruling in this case, and with the Crown Prosecution Service statement which sends out a clear message that people have the right to use reasonable self-defence and that they will not face prosecution for doing so. That, we believe, is a fundamental principle which is vital in preserving the public's respect and trust in the law.
Comments
by sansue
Thursday, September 06 2012, 4:43PM
“"See that all the dogooders are out in force today defending the burglars"
Really? Where are you looking? I can't see a single comment that defends the burglars; can you tell me which one you are referring to?
And to the 14 people who red arrowed my earlier comment, are you seriously suggesting that someone who has shot someone shouldn't even be arrested whilst an investigation takes place? I'm hoping not, but I'm sure someone will explain. Can I remind you all of the uproar in the USA when the man who shot dead Trayvon Martin wasn't arrested whilst the shooting was investigated...................”
by sansue
Thursday, September 06 2012, 4:38PM
“"The question you and others need to ask yourselves, Patrick, is what criminal offence took place first? Of course, and without doubt, it was the trespassing of these intruders who with malice aforethought entered this property knowing what their intentions were.There is absolutely no defence for such actions and they deserved all they got!!"
That is SO not the question we need to ask! Are you seriously saying that anyone who breaks the law forfeits the protection of the law, and that people can do whatever they want to them, even if what you do to them would be illegal if you did it "first"?!”
by colarrey
Thursday, September 06 2012, 2:57PM
“Eastonian
Trespass is only common law but entry into a building illegally with intent to commit a crime, especially theft, is burglary.
At 12.30am in the morning, I doubt that civil trespass was on their minds!”
by Rob_1
Thursday, September 06 2012, 2:53PM
“See that all the dogooders are out in force today defending the burglars. They went there with the sole intention of burgling the property and they got what they deserved also its good to see the CPS coming down on the side of the public for once and not the criminals.”
by Toddy2010
Thursday, September 06 2012, 1:40PM
“@eastonian
"what criminal offence took place first? Of course, and without doubt, it was the trespassing"
except for the fact that trespass (by itself) is a civil, not a criminal matter.”
by Ledecestre
Thursday, September 06 2012, 12:57PM
“Tony Martin fired at people running away with an illegally held firearm so that case is entirely different to this one.”
by karinfall1955
Thursday, September 06 2012, 11:54AM
“Did the farmer Tony Martin ever receive a backdated apology for having been jailed for shooting intruders that were in his house at the time? I don't personally much care whether they were approaching or retreating at the time. You enter someones home with ill intent at your peril. The people lived in an isolated farmhouse they must have been terrified.”
by Eastonian
Thursday, September 06 2012, 10:05AM
“Commonsense has prevailed and this aspect must be celebrated as it doesn't always.
The question you and others need to ask yourselves, Patrick, is what criminal offence took place first? Of course, and without doubt, it was the trespassing of these intruders who with malice aforethought entered this property knowing what their intentions were.There is absolutely no defence for such actions and they deserved all they got!!”
by sansue
Thursday, September 06 2012, 9:53AM
“""It would appear in this case that common sense has prevailed; what is even more welcome is that the decision has been arrived at promptly, rather than through a protracted course taking several months and increasing the stress on the parties involved, whilst running up extensive legal bills in the process...
Good news, and it brings some balance to crime stories that appear to focus on the rights of the criminals rather than their victims.""
This story just goes to show the problems and misconceptions with this kind of case. It is standard practice to arrest people in this situation; it means nothing. Of course they have to be arrested whilst the police establish the facts. However, people somehow equate this with a presumption of guilt. Even the woman's stepfather is quoted as saying "I feel so overjoyed the charges have been dropped"; there NEVER were any charges!!!!
It is totally innapropriate for some newspapers to whip people up into a hysteria about cases like this when nobody even ends up being charged. What they are in effect protesting about is the police investigating the incident properly!!”
by LikeItaLot
Thursday, September 06 2012, 9:50AM
“Have we details of the wounds because I have read none. As Patrick says they do have a bearing”