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’.
Oh no they understand, people were just getting wro fully charged for doing so before.
I’d be really interested to see an actual example of someone who was wrongfully charged in a situation that was clearly self-defence, as I’ve never yet seen one. And by that I do mean a) the charges stuck, and b) the situation was still clearly self-defence once all the facts were known.