Heard this on my lunchtime news yesterday, really made my day, thought that I’d share… enjoy 🙂
AN elderly St Francis Bay woman shot and killed one of two intruders in her home early yesterday after they broke into her house and held her hostage. Police said the 72-year-old was assaulted and robbed at about 3am by the men, who were armed with a screwdriver and knife.
The attackers gained entry by breaking a window and opening a sliding door.
Warrant Officer Marianette Olivier said the woman had heard a noise inside the house just before the men stormed her bedroom and attacked her.
“They confronted her, tied her hands behind her back and blindfolded her, demanding bank cards and pin numbers,” Olivier said. “One of the robbers allegedly took her Mercedes-Benz and drove to a nearby ATM, where he withdrew an undisclosed amount of money.
“While he was drawing the money, his accomplice remained behind in the house.”
The nearest ATM is at a local shopping centre about 2km from her home. During the time that the robber was at the ATM, the woman managed to untie herself when the other attacker left the room. In a panic, she grabbed her 38 special revolver.
“The suspect saw her with the firearm and allegedly ran towards her in an attempt to stab her,” Olivier said.
“According to her, she then fired three shots at him, but only two hit him.”
The wounded attacker, whose identity is not known to the police, died at the scene.
“His accomplice returned to the house only minutes later and found him dead and her with a firearm,” Olivier said.
“In a hasty escape, he jumped out of the MercedesBenz and ran away without attempting to confront her.”
The woman was taken to relatives in nearby Oyster Bay as she was suffering from shock and feared the other robber would return.
“She is very traumatised by the incident and still in shock,” Olivier said.
“Her doctor was called to the house shortly after the attack and treated her at the scene. We have spoken to the family and at this stage they do not want to talk to the media.” Police refused to divulge the woman’s name, saying she was now part of a criminal investigation.
Many residents in St Francis Bay remained unaware of the attack and were alerted only after The Herald spoke to various home and business owners in the area.
Neighbour Andy Nosworthy said he had been unaware of the incident, but said he had wakened at about 3am after his dogs “went mad”.
“I got up when I heard the dogs barking and turned all the outside lights on,” Nosworthy said.
“I saw nothing and went back to bed. Only in the morning did I see that one of our cars in the driveway had been broken into and the radio face was on the ground.”
Nosworthy said he suspected the attackers had been frightened when they heard the dogs and then scaled the fence into the woman’s yard. Her property is relatively unprotected, with only a low wall surrounding the house.
Her son-inlaw, who owns a guesthouse in St Francis Bay, only a few kilometres from where the attack occurred, was tight-lipped about the attack, but said she was doing well. “She defended herself and is a very brave woman to have done that.
“We need more people who are not intimidated by criminals,” he said.
“She is resting at the moment, so understand that she does not want to talk.”
A case of murder and robbery is being investigated, but the woman has not been charged.
“She is in shock at the moment and once she calms down, detectives will take her statement and take it from there,” Olivier said.
“Once we have all the details we will take the documents to the Director of Public Prosecutions for a decision on what further action should be taken.
“At this stage it appears she acted in self defence, but the investigation will reveal all the details.”
The woman’s car was impounded by police so forensic experts could obtain fingerprints and evidence to help identify the robbers.
(End of report)
Hope you all enjoyed reading this, I know that I did!
Boadicea's Chariot 
And the moral of this story is – don’t bring a knife to a gunfight. Way to go Gran 😀
Good result, I would say. 🙂
Just a shame they didn’t both get more than they bargained for!
Good job she was not in the UK, she would have been done for violating his ‘ooman rights!
Sounds like the old lady is in deep shock – shame. She can well do without having to prove it was ‘self-defence’. The thugs broke into her home, mistreated her badly, stole from her and she has to prove that she was in the right! What a nonsense…
Morning all.
Don’t fret too much about the investigation, the gran will simply have to prove that the gun was licenced and confirm the odd detail or two. I imagine that it will be more procedural, done over tea and cake.
I’m surprised that she was living on her own in what sounds like a ‘low security’ environment, low walls, no dogs an unsecured sliding door (no deadlock!) I would have thought that her family would have encouraged her to either move or improve her security, perhaps they did, she sounds like the sort of old lady who would say ‘just let them try.’
That is good to know, Soutie. There are too many countries where the rights of the criminals take precedence.
What a heart-warming ending!
In San Francisco they would be turned into martyrs and heroes of a vicious, cold-blooded woman.
Interesting – the colour of the offenders and the victim aren’t mentioned. How refreshing. Call me a cynic, but I bet I can guess.
FEEG – stop perpetuating stupid narrow minded poplist urban myths. If anyone comes at you with a knife in the UK you have a total defence in law to kill.
Er, Cuprum – how about the charges that would be brought relating to possessing a firearm of a prohibited type without a licence?
You’re being a bit harsh, I think. FEEG was validly reflecting the resentment that UK citizens feel about the fact that several victims in the UK have been prosecuted and imprisoned for defending themselves or their property. The courts regularly penalise victims and release crims with a slap on the wrist.
Bearsy I disagree quite strongly. FEEG was making no distinction and even if he was do you not think it valid to have laws around legal possession of lethal weapons? I don’t want to live in a society where one can get and keep firearms without due diligence. Hence, the number of deaths and murders in this country are a darn site fewer than yours and the majority of the western world.
I would almost guarantee that if that were the case she would only receive a minimal nominal punishment for having an unlicensed weapon.
As you so often point out, you don’t live here now and don’t have an understanding of the issues. I can only think of one example to which you refer where a farmer shot and killed a burglar who was a dirty scum of a gypsy. But the lad was walking away from him and posed no threat hence the farmer was prosecuted quite rightly. I know I’m in a minority of populist opinion, but the press made it into something it wasn’t.
Find me the “several examples” and we’ll have a sensible debate. Stop perpetuating this right wing fallacy of the shortcomings of the rule of law around self defence. We all know it isn’t perfect but so it isn’t in Aus, and probably SA.
I do agree the sentencing of offenders by the judiciary is in a sad state as I believe in lock ’em up and they can’t reoffend, but that’s an entirely different debate. Interestingly a conservative government is wanting to let them all out early to save money and the public is saying no so they’re having to reconsider.
Grrr.
Oops! Sorry Guv, I’ll come quietly …
But I challenge you, in turn, to show that things are worse here in Australia. In NSW, for at least the last 10 years, there have been laws that recognise the right to self-defence which are not based around the shaky concept of ‘appropriate force’. There may be in other States too, but NSW certainly got its act together on several common sense rulings – like making householders NOT liable for burglars breaking their legs on the property, and so on.
Please don’t hit me, Guv. 😦
Incidentally, enough already of the “right-wing” stuff. I’ll have you know I voted for our Kev. 🙂
Bearsy, you must be mellowing. 🙂
No fear of that, Tocino. It’s just that I know Cuprum rather well – he’s a big, beefy ex-rugger player … 🙂
Cuprum. Ever heard of irony? None the less, it is widely known that there have been many cases in the UK where people defending themselves have been prosecuted for using excessive force. It all depends on the legal definition of REASONABLE force. In my view that means anything pr means that comes to hand, lethal or not!
FEEG – ok ok, I had a sense of humour failure, apologies, I just have rather passionate opinions sometimes! But many cases? Where, when, who? Give me an example and we’ll talk about it! 😀
And Bearsy, I’d never hit you dear chap….unless you hit me first! 😀
I agree, the definition of reasonable force is a tricky one, but as in all cases in court it is for the prosecution to show that the force wasn’t reasonable, not the other way round. The legislation that NSW seems to have brought appears sensible and I applaud it, however the matters that is addresses aren’t criminal cases, they’re civil, and I am no expert there. I agree – to prosecute a home owner for a burglar breaking his leg would be absurd.
And FEEG, indeed, I keep something close to my bed in case of intruders that many may consider to be an offensive weapon, but I possess it legally and I am trained in how to use it properly so I would feel confident of not getting charged it fit came to that. Case law has frequently covered the fact that one person’s reasonable is another person’s excessive – age, size, threat, mens rea all count to that assessment.
Interestingly to provoke further debate – did that policeman who pushed over the drunk paper salesman Ian Tomlinson when he failed to follow simple instructions use excessive force? I’m sure all of you here think yes he was excessive. I don’t, but there you go.
Cuprum –
The NSW legislation is not related to prosecuting a home owner for injuries to a burglar, it’s about making him and his insurance company pay millions in compo. Before Bob Carr changed things there had been several crims who had retired comfortably on the proceeds of injuring themselves in the execution of a theft.
Now to Tomlinson’s killer.
He didn’t push him over, he hit him hard with his truncheon – I’ve seen the video, along with millions of others. He was an out of order bully, it was clear that he fully intended to do harm, it was unnecessary, excessive and was inappropriate behaviour for a so-called guardian of the law. And his number was hidden, which is illegal. He should get life imprisonment and have his goolies cut off. At the very least.
Indeed – civil law. A completely different animal. Sounds like a victory for common sense. 😀
As for the second paragraph….you make some valid calm points but then enter into wide eyed hysteria. I shall take a chariot irony pill and reply gently.
I agree, the covering of the collar number is wrong. The Met had it as common practice and you’ll find every copper outside that parish thinks ill of them for it. That practice is no more.
I have viewed that same video – the one with no sound and with no context before or after. The bloke was a drunken idiot looking for a reaction, refusing to follow clear, unambiguous and loud instructions. I am also aware of what that particular serial of officers had been through in the preceding hours and also of the very specific briefing they received. If he hadn’t have died (which due to his condition he was probably going to do so soon anyway) then none of it would have even been mentioned. Only 6 others put in complaints of assault (kettling aside – that’s another issue) and when you consider this in context of the size of the operation that’s not a bad statistic really.
If you hit someone with a baton you don’t do it gently, that would defeat the point. The baton hit didn’t knock him over, the push did. I personally am glad that there are people willing to stand in between anarchic idiots and normal law abiding citizens. I’d agree at a push that perhaps a charge of common assault may be appropriate but to be charged with murder?
Yes, the Met as a group can be a bunch of mob handed thugs at times – personally if I was at a protest I would therefore make sure I didn’t give them a reason to assault me in any way – I’d follow their instructions as I’m sure you would.
And back to the original thread, I’m up for debate when examples of where victims have been prosecuted under criminal law are brought to this forum!
Cuprum, have a look at this one.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1212680/Millionaire-faces-jail-attack-knife-raider-home.html
I seem to recall you don’t like the Daily Mail, so you can probably find it in the Bucks Free Press or some other paper local to High Wycombe.
Hmm, I’m not sure that chasing the intruder into a neighbouring garden then beating him up with a cricket bat continues to count as defence of your person or home?
But the guy who chased the intruder was the victim originally. He and his family were subjected to a very unpleasant attack and he fits Cuprum’s definition of a “victim prosecuted under criminal law”. Anyway, why get the blood on your own carpet?
Sheona, you are correct in your understanding of my thoughts regarding the hate rag called the Daily Mail. That aside….
I think the piece you have picked describes perfectly how the law can work effectively without prejudice. Yes the offender turned into a victim and the victim into an offender. But at what point does self defence become an assault? Well your honour, as he was running away and escaping I still felt threatened enough to run after him and keep hitting him is not what I call self defence, it’s American foreign policy FFS!
You have picked a perfect example proving my point, thank you!
PS, the offender that escaped was properly prosecuted, the offender hit by the baseball bat I believe hasn’t yet faced charges due to the injuries. Shame (take note I am no apologist for his criminal behaviour and he deserves to be put away for a long time). However, the bat wielding ‘victim’ should be done for perjury too as he clearly couldn’t lie straight in bed!
As I recollect, the aggrieved householder was sent to prison, but freed shortly after. But you must admit that taking a strong stance against a criminal might serve “pour encourager les autres”. If you set out to commit a crime, you automatically leave your “human rights” behind in my opinion.
I might feel inclined to chase after someone with a cricket bat (if I had one) and batter them (if I had the strength) if they had subjected me (or mine) to a vicious treatment… and I would claim ‘rage of the moment’.
It is entirely unreasonable to expect people who have been through an extremely stressful experience to sit down quietly, take consider all the options – and do nothing.
Cuprum – lighten up!
My closing remarks in #18 were intended as humour in order to lighten up an otherwise serious comment, not “wide-eyed hysteria”. It was far too late in the evening to be hysterical.
Now, whether you call it a truncheon, an asp, a baton or a nightstick, it is still a dangerous weapon capable of inflicting serious injury. I remember seeing a photograph of a young lady’s leg which had been hit by a copper’s weapon in the same demonstration (or one at roughly the same time) – it was one massive bruise from thigh to ankle. In Tomlinson’s case I seem to remember that recent forensic evidence has shown that it was the blow from the baton which killed him rather than the push.
Again – “only six complaints” of assault? How easily you sweep away excessive force against innocent citizens. Nothing in the law gives coppers a right to do this.
Again – “apart from kettling”. “Kettling” is a terrible police state concept which should never have been introduced into any civilised country. It is also psychologically unsound – has nobody there learnt that the last thing you do is corner frightened animals in a corner from which they can’t escape? Even a cat or a rabbit may try to kill a human if placed in such a situation. To put frightened innocent people – who may be elderly, pregnant or disabled into a corner where they cannot escape – is a criminal act in any moral person’s book. Suppose someone needs the loo? The cops will do them for “public indecency” if they do it in the open, so what’s the answer there? Suppose they need medication after a while – for diabetes, say, or some other chronic condition? No, Cuprum, ‘kettling’ cannot be condoned under any circumstance and the Brit police became a mechanism for totalitarian oppression the day it was introduced. It is frightening that even a reasonable, fair-minded person like your good self can be brainwashed into thinking it’s OK. It isn’t.
Part two follows after breakfast …
Looking forward to Part two. 🙂
Boadicea has already addressed my theme for part two, so I will merely repeat that if a malefactor enters my house he has already gone outside the law. If I am frightened for myself or my family, I will do everything I can to bring that malefactor down, and if this means chasing after him and subduing him with a handy cricket bat, so be it.
For you, or anyone else to assert that I would have turned from victim to offender is politically correct nonsense of the worst kind.
As it happens this particular ‘no-one-is-going-to-stop-me-from-going-where-I-want’ idiot decided that she was going to the Guildhall Library on the 2nd of April 2009 – the day of the G-20 London summit for those who don’t know – and the Library is almost bang smack in the middle of the proposed demonstration.
The train from Brighton was packed with eager, young things who reminded me of a friend in the sixties who went on every demonstration there was – and usually came home with a bruise or two… He got no sympathy from me. They were, as far as I was concerned, the price of playing the fool. I don’t remember too many fatalities at that time.
When I got to Moorgate station, I was informed by an exceedingly rude copper that I couldn’t go through my normal exit. Leaving the station was an eye opener – I have never seen so many policemen or cameras in one spot in my life. And quite bluntly they all looked as though they were out on a ‘jolly’ – in much the same mood as the youngsters on the train…
The wretched Guildhall, wimps that they are, had decided to close for the day and I wandered off to find another Archive to spend the day in. So, back I went to Moorgate station, where the demonstrators had started to arrive and were unfurling their banners.
I don’t know how the violence started, but it seemed to me that the mood of both groups was that they were going to have some ‘fun’…
I have no idea how it turned so nasty, and I have every sympathy with the police struggling to control a crowd – but ‘kettling’ people into a corner is not the way to calm a situation. And the fact that the Met had their numbers hidden, says to me that they were intent on causing damage with no possible recriminations…
At no point have I endorsed kettling. Nowhere have I endorsed the Met Police – they can be a bunch of thugs when in large numbers together – indeed I have experienced it first hand on several occasions.
I understood this to be a discussion over self defence and with hindsight I shouldn’t have waved the red rag of the Tomlinson death to those who don’t really know the facts. I apologise for that.
Anyway, the SA lady that started all this discussion did what we all wish we would do if we were in that situation – actually research has shown that most of us who had not had any training would freeze and not do what she did. Good on her I say, and the burglar deserved to die. My point about having the weapon legally is a fair and valid one, and I’m sure all sensible charioteers would support there being sensible laws about possession of such weapons. Hence in this country unlike America we do have quite strict laws which clearly have prevented a gun culture. A tick in the well done box for the UK.
And Boadicea – I doubt very much your moral code would allow you to keep battering someone no matter what they had done once you had them in your control. Again, research has shown that one’s mind looses the red mist quite quickly once the opponent stops fighting back.
To cry ‘lighten up’ when you talk with such hysteria (chopping off testicles) is a little naughty really. Six assaults against ‘innocent civilians’? Define innocent Bearsy – how many officer were assaulted? 237, that’s how many. Do the sums. That meas 237 innocent citizens have assaulted a police officer – in yank land or SA you’d be shot for that. The UK is one of the few countries in the world where such violence and disorder results in one unfortunate and sad death and 6 other injuries. It’s a price I’m prepared to pay to live in a healthy democracy not a police state as you would no doubt call it.
The blog ‘thought of the day’ you put up last week had 3 police officers killed in the line of duty, killed by terrorists and mindless idiots. You can’t support both sides here. I wonder, what did you demand at more recent riots, eg that young man that defaced the Cenotaph. Did you think the police should have assaulted him? Yes you did as I recall. I invite you to attend the next riot and see how you would deal with it.
Apart from that – I shall repeat – kettling is an unnecessary and aggresive tactic that is utilized by senior officers who merely tried to regain control when hamstrung by such strong civil liberty legislation that prevents a pre-emptive strike being a sensible tactic to control anarchists.
Anyway, I’m off to play golf in the rain, and I’m sure we can end on a note to agree to disagree and end it there! 😀
Cuprum – it’s a quotation from an old satirical current affairs comedy program on BBC2, I’m sorry that you’re too young to remember it. It was not hysteria then, and it’s not hysteria now.
I’ll answer you more fully later. Enjoy the golf.