"To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing,
if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?"
-- Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803

Punishing the Innocent

by Lee

I’ve blogged numerous times in the past on Britain being a police state where the citizens have absolutely no right to defend themselves.  Here I find myself, once again, proven right.

A man who stabbed to death an armed intruder at his home was jailed for eight years today.

Carl Lindsay, 25, answered a knock at his door in Salford, Greater Manchester, to find four men armed with a gun.

When the gang tried to rob him he grabbed a samurai sword and stabbed one of them, 37-year-old Stephen Swindells, four times.

Mr Swindells, of Salford, was later found collapsed in an alley and died in hospital.

Lindsay, of Walkden, was found guilty of manslaughter following a three-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.

He was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.

After the case, Detective Chief Inspector Sam Haworth said: “Four men, including the victim, had set out purposefully to rob Carl Lindsay and this intent ultimately led to Stephen Swindells’ death.

“I believe the sentences passed today reflect the severity of the circumstances.”

Three other men were charged with robbery and firearms offences in connection with the incident, which took place in February last year.

In other words, the criminals who were armed with guns are going to receive lesser sentences than the man who was merely defending himself.  Notice, gun control fans, that the criminals had the gun while the homeowner was forced to grab a ceremonial sword Pulp Fiction-style and defend himself.  So, not only was British gun control an abject failure in keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, the British legal system just punished an innocent man for defending himself when the British police state could not.  When four armed men break into your house, can there possibly be a clearer example of a case of justifiable homicide?

Absolutely disgusting.  I weep for the British people, I really do.  And this is what the Michael Moores of the world want to see for the United States.

Update: It appears that there is more to the story than it appeared initially.

A DRUG dealer killed a man with a 12-inch sword after a gang of armed robbers slipped into his flat, a court was told.

Carl Lindsay, aged 25, swung the sword after he was threatened with a self-loading pistol.

Manchester Crown Court was told that Stephen Swindells died after suffering four main wounds, all inflicted from behind. One had severed an artery causing massive blood loss and death.  . . .

Prosecutor Alan Wolstenholme said Lindsay had sold cannabis for some months to callers at his home. . . .

There was a scuffle and, with the sword at shoulder height, Lindsay chased the trio out of his flat.

Lindsay later told police he had been the victim of a robbery and had stabbed one of his assailants.

So perhaps in this case the conviction was justified, but perhaps not.  Ultimately, here in the United States, even a drug dealer in the process of selling drugs has the right to defend his life, even against other criminals who are there to steal his drugs.

Comments

<< Back to main