Hmmm. The article indicates a broken window, and further ‘medical and forensic evidence’. If the broken window was the point of access, it might indicate that a lot of the cuts sustained by the alleged intruder could be traced to the broken glass. That fact would change the entire scenario. It then becomes ‘much ado about nothing’.
"Open season’ has a tendency to develop into open warfare against anyone you do not like. Unrestricted ‘self defense’ is wide open to abuse, like it is in America.
Alright, so if someone breaks in to your home with a crossbow, what is the limit on your self defense?
This case makes it clear. Once the authorities determine through an investigation all of the facts, and what actually happened, and collect all the facts, they will determine if the level of self-defense was appropriate.
I’m not sure I can agree. Why did they not simply wait to get the facts before filing charges?
This guy has had to deal with the fallout of being charged/arraigned/etc. and probably had to retain a barrister. The news said that they dropped the charges due to a conviction being practically impossible. Reading the details, it sounds like there was a strong defense for the resident to claim that most of the cuts were from the home invader cutting himself up on the window he broke in through…
So the charges were not dropped because it’s ok to defend yourself, the charges were dropped because they can’t prove that this guy sliced up the home invader.
This case doesn’t do anything to show where the line is.