• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Hither Green 'burglar' stabbing: Man, 78, arrested

Status
Not open for further replies.

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,564
Location
Somewhere
Well its in the mans best interest to co-operate in the interview. If he doesn't then that will go against him. If he doesn't hand over cloths and DNA then that maybe an arrestable offense in of itself.

Living in a crime scene: Note he has been bailed. That doesn't mean the crime scene is no longer active so how do you think it works now? Entering and disturbing a crime scene is an offense. There will be officers at the crime scene.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,840
Well its in the mans best interest to co-operate in the interview. If he doesn't then that will go against him. If he doesn't hand over cloths and DNA then that maybe an arrestable offense in of itself.

Living in a crime scene: Note he has been bailed. That doesn't mean the crime scene is no longer active so how do you think it works now? Entering and disturbing a crime scene is an offense. There will be officers at the crime scene.

He doesn't have to co-operate, he has a right to remain silent.

Presumably he will be staying somewhere else if his home is still a crime scene.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,624
Well its in the mans best interest to co-operate in the interview. If he doesn't then that will go against him. If he doesn't hand over cloths and DNA then that maybe an arrestable offense in of itself.

Living in a crime scene: Note he has been bailed. That doesn't mean the crime scene is no longer active so how do you think it works now? Entering and disturbing a crime scene is an offense. There will be officers at the crime scene.

Regardless of the scenario, he killed someone. If you kill someone (and you aren't a police officer or member of the armed forces acting under reasonable cause), then why on earth is it a surprise that you will be arrested while the police investigate? How on earth is that difficult to understand?
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,664
Location
LBK
Well its in the mans best interest to co-operate in the interview. If he doesn't then that will go against him. If he doesn't hand over cloths and DNA then that maybe an arrestable offense in of itself.

Living in a crime scene: Note he has been bailed. That doesn't mean the crime scene is no longer active so how do you think it works now? Entering and disturbing a crime scene is an offense. There will be officers at the crime scene.

No, the forensics are done when the person is arrested. This secures the scene and the police collect what they need and conduct a search as necessary. An arrest is immediate and removes the person at the earliest opportunity so this can be done.

It is not always in a suspect's best interests to give any answers to an interview. Often, the sensible thing to do is "no comment" throughout. Remember that the police must collect evidence and that refusing to cooperate in an interview is not evidence in itself, although a jury may draw inference should it reach trial. We don't know the circumstances of the case anyway.

I'm really shocked to read people suggest the police shouldn't be doing their job here.

Who'd be a copper?
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,949
Location
Fenny Stratford
He doesn't have to co-operate, he has a right to remain silent.
You do have a right to silence but while the right to remain silent under police questioning and the privilege against self-incrimination are generally recognised international standards under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 inferences may be drawn from your silence. That's why the caution says:

You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.

(As an aside If i remember correctly the caution prior to 1994 was something like: You do not have to say anything if you do not wish to do so, but anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law.

Compare that with the "Miranda" rights in the usa: You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning and at trial. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.)
 
Last edited:

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
20,445
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
they are still human beings and they still have rights. The deceased here is the victim of an act greater than burglary. I know this will upset you but the act of burglary does not allow you to simply have the right to kill someone. That said I don't have much in the way of sympathy for burglars if they get duffed up.

It doesn't upset me that others may take a different viewpoint, however as far as I concerned unlawfully entering another person's home with the express intent of stealing possessions (or worse) renders the person liable for whatever they get. If confronted with that situation, I'd certainly be doing whatever was necessary to ensure I was *very sure* the threat was completely neutralised. Sorry if this offends anyone, but if I killed someone in the process, in that situation I can't envisage feeling guilty or regretful about it. One less burglar free to roam is not a bad outcome IMV.

If one doesn't want to risk being on the receiving end of a potentially heavy retaliatory outcome, *don't break into someone else's house*. Simple! As posted elsewhere, it's hard to end up in someone else's house by accident.

Nonetheless, I have no problem with the police conducting a thorough investigation, as I would expect for any situation where loss of life has occurred. I would, however, expect the householder to be treated well by the police whilst the process takes its course.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,609
If you kill someone (and you aren't a police officer or member of the armed forces acting under reasonable cause),

Actually it’s by no means unknown for police marksmen to be arrested and extensively investigated for shooting suspects. They operate under exactly the same requirements for reasonableness and proportionality as the rest of us (albeit obviously most people are not allowed to openly carry guns in the UK).

While it’s quite right that the decision to use lethal force is scrutinised, things have perhaps gone a little too far in the wrong direction in the U.K. in my opinion (look at the Mark Duggan case, for example).

This is also part of the reason why the police is struggling to recruit armed officers.

Who'd be a copper?

Quite. They’re usually damned either way.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,609
It doesn't upset me that others may take a different viewpoint, however as far as I concerned unlawfully entering another person's home with the express intent of stealing possessions (or worse) renders the person liable for whatever they get. If confronted with that situation, I'd certainly be doing whatever was necessary to ensure I was *very sure* the threat was completely neutralised. Sorry if this offends anyone, but if I killed someone in the process, in that situation I can't envisage feeling guilty or regretful about it. One less burglar free to roam is not a bad outcome IMV.

If one doesn't want to risk being on the receiving end of a potentially heavy retaliatory outcome, *don't break into someone else's house*. Simple! As posted elsewhere, it's hard to end up in someone else's house by accident.

Nonetheless, I have no problem with the police conducting a thorough investigation, as I would expect for any situation where loss of life has occurred. I would, however, expect the householder to be treated well by the police whilst the process takes its course.

I quite agree.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,671
Has anyone heard whether the other burglar has been traced? I'd imagine, assuming the police know the identity of the dead man, they would by now have a good idea of his accomplice. At least the Lewisham police are not as overwhelmed with murder cases as their counterparts on the other side of the Thames.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,671
I've actually managed to do this before. Luckily for me the owner wasn't a farmer with a shotgun...
I take it then that you have totally open house at your property, or are you in a secure unit by any chance? 'Alice in Wonderland' stuff.
 

tony_mac

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2009
Messages
3,626
Location
Liverpool
I take it then that you have totally open house at your property, or are you in a secure unit by any chance? 'Alice in Wonderland' stuff.
No, neither.
it was in Birkenhead. I guess not many people would call it a 'Wonderland'. Weird stuff happens sometimes.
I also once went into somebody's locked office by mistake. It turns out my key worked their office door, and it was too lost in thought to notice I was on the wrong floor. My first thought on going in was 'that door isn't supposed to be there'.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,957
Location
York
Did anyone else hear the interview on BBC R4 "PM Programme" yesterday with the dead man's cousin? All about what a lovely family man he was and so on. Should something like this have been given air-time, or was it just typical BBC left-liberal bias?
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,840
As more and more details come to light it's clear just what an odious individual this burglar was and it seems that the rest of his family are no better. I think it's highly unlikely that the householder will be prosecuted.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,949
Location
Fenny Stratford
There is an interesting blog by The Secret Barrister on this very matter which I commend to the house: https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/04/05/bashing-burglars-and-the-law-of-self-defence/

Secret Barrister said:
Bashing burglars and the law of self-defence

It doesn't upset me that others may take a different viewpoint, however as far as I concerned unlawfully entering another person's home with the express intent of stealing possessions (or worse) renders the person liable for whatever they get. If confronted with that situation, I'd certainly be doing whatever was necessary to ensure I was *very sure* the threat was completely neutralised. Sorry if this offends anyone, but if I killed someone in the process, in that situation I can't envisage feeling guilty or regretful about it. One less burglar free to roam is not a bad outcome IMV.

If one doesn't want to risk being on the receiving end of a potentially heavy retaliatory outcome, *don't break into someone else's house*. Simple! As posted elsewhere, it's hard to end up in someone else's house by accident.

Nonetheless, I have no problem with the police conducting a thorough investigation, as I would expect for any situation where loss of life has occurred. I would, however, expect the householder to be treated well by the police whilst the process takes its course.

I will have to agree to disagree with you on this point:

as I concerned unlawfully entering another person's home with the express intent of stealing possessions (or worse) renders the person liable for whatever they get

as the law simply doesn't say that. You are entitled to protect you and yours. Those breaking into your home, scumbags as they maybe, still have the right to not be killed out of hand. You are not given free reign to kill them for the "mere" act of burgalry. However as I have said I don't have much sympathy for people breaking into your home and trying to nick your stuff finding themselves on the end of a duffing!

(and i also doubt it is possible to be as blase as you suggest about killing another person, no matter how righteous you think that might be)
 

OneOffDave

Member
Joined
2 Apr 2015
Messages
453
If nothing else, cleaning up after you've killed someone in your house is surprisingly expensive and time consuming. The mess left by the forensic team doesn't help either.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
20,445
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
There is an interesting blog by The Secret Barrister on this very matter which I commend to the house: https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/04/05/bashing-burglars-and-the-law-of-self-defence/





I will have to agree to disagree with you on this point:



as the law simply doesn't say that. You are entitled to protect you and yours. Those breaking into your home, scumbags as they maybe, still have the right to not be killed out of hand. You are not given free reign to kill them for the "mere" act of burgalry. However as I have said I don't have much sympathy for people breaking into your home and trying to nick your stuff finding themselves on the end of a duffing!

(and i also doubt it is possible to be as blase as you suggest about killing another person, no matter how righteous you think that might be)

I was giving my opinion, I never said that opinion exactly corresponds with the law as it stands, although my view is that is how it should be - subject to a full investigation corroborating the facts.

As to being blasé about it, thankfully I’ve never been in that situation and hopefully won’t ever need to put it to the test. I do think burglary is something the police could treat more seriously - maybe impressions are wrong but it does seem to be a crime that the police treat as fairly low priority.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,664
Location
LBK
I was giving my opinion, I never said that opinion exactly corresponds with the law as it stands, although my view is that is how it should be - subject to a full investigation corroborating the facts.

As to being blasé about it, thankfully I’ve never been in that situation and hopefully won’t ever need to put it to the test. I do think burglary is something the police could treat more seriously - maybe impressions are wrong but it does seem to be a crime that the police treat as fairly low priority.

But as the blog post outlines, a full investigation can only happen once the suspect has been arrested.

This is not just a legal duty, it's practical as well. You need to remove the suspect from the scene, detain them, and collect evidence.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,949
Location
Fenny Stratford
As to being blasé about it, thankfully I’ve never been in that situation and hopefully won’t ever need to put it to the test. I do think burglary is something the police could treat more seriously - maybe impressions are wrong but it does seem to be a crime that the police treat as fairly low priority.

I agree entirely - it is treated as a low priority by an over stretched and under funded police and criminal justice system. There are some interesting comments in the linked blog on that.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,525
Location
Yorkshire
Did anyone else hear the interview on BBC R4 "PM Programme" yesterday with the dead man's cousin? All about what a lovely family man he was and so on.
These sort of people have almost no morals, and no shame. They think they are right all the time, no matter what they do. They are never prepared to take responsibility for their actions, but they know how to demand their rights. I've had the misfortune to encounter odious individuals. Their attitude is that they have the right to burgle people and do what they want, and there is no effective punishment that we can do to stop them.

There are individuals in my home city (York) who are constantly burgling people, and only put away for a short time each time, only to reoffend almost instantly. Apologists for such individuals totally wrongly blame everyone but the burglar. There is no effective deterrent or punishment we have in this country to deal with serial burglars. And I am not confident there ever will be. It's a disgrace.

I have zero sympathy for such burglars - who have total disregard for good honest people - regardless of what happens to them, and I struggle to understand how any right-minded person can, but that's something they have to live with and we all know they are totally and utterly wrong. We won't ever change their views.

As more and more details come to light it's clear just what an odious individual this burglar was and it seems that the rest of his family are no better. I think it's highly unlikely that the householder will be prosecuted.
I certainly hope he won't be. If he is, then we need a massive campaign against the CPS (who have acted disgracefully in numerous cases and done more than enough bungling in recent years)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/05/burglar-killed-pensioners-home-wanted-previous-robbery/
Henry Vincent, 37, from Kent, was stabbed during a break-in at the home of pensioner, Richard Osborn-Brooks, 78, in Hither Green on Wednesday.

He was wanted over a separate burglary involving another elderly victim, it has emerged.

His family's gang operated in Kent and south London and was jailed for a total of almost 29 years in 2003 after conning pensioners out of £448,180.

[..]

Undeterred, Vincent was jailed again in 2009 after being convicted of defrauding an 80-year-old out of £72,000 for alleged roof repairs.

It has emerged that the pensioner - who was confronted by two intruders, one of them armed with a screwdriver - may have been trying to protect his wife Maureen.

One of the men went upstairs while Vincent scuffled with Mr Osborn-Brooks and was stabbed.

The family of the burglar is a disgrace. Their comments are highly provocative and make me feel angry:
His uncle Stevie, who lives close to his home in Orpington, said: “We’re in mourning here. We don’t want to talk about what’s been said about Henry. We’ve already had the Old Bill round here. We’re not commenting on anything.”

His cousin, who was not identified, told the BBC she was angry Mr Osborn-Brooks had been bailed. "I don't know what happened in that home. But all I do know is that my cousin is dead today," she said.

"The Henry I know, he was such a loving person, and it's probably something which just went wrong but he shouldn't have died out of it."
Henry was a horrible person. If he had had his way I have no doubt he would have continued to burgle people for decades. I am glad that this can no longer happen. But I am angry that many other career burglars and fraudsters will be allowed to continue to terrorise people in their own homes.

What a disgrace of a family. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Charlene Barnes, a property and legal adviser who lives in Ladywell not far from Mr Osborn-Brooks' home, said that three masked men had attempted to burgle her last October.

She told the Daily Telegraph that her 15-year-old daughter had called her screaming and told her they were attempting to get into their house in broad daylight and she rushed to the scene as the police were called.

The men were disturbed by one of her neighbour's sons and fled. Residents managed to detain one and take his "massive" knife from him, but he escaped before police arrived, she said.

Ms Barnes said: "It is a real fear around here, there is a big fear of burglary and knife crime.
There is no effective deterrent, so this is going to continue to be a big problem and get worse. Our legal system is a total and utter disgrace and assigns far too many rights and chances to absolutely disgraceful individuals. We need change.
 
Last edited:

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,126
Location
Birmingham
Having been the victim of a violent home robbery (not burglary as there is a difference), I think the offenders need to go away for a very long time. Having occurred in late 2012, I found out recently that one of the individuals was released in March 2018 - the easy sentences are no deterrent. Considering what they went on to do (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-21256852), we got off lightly in comparison

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-21256852 said:
Boy, 9, threatened with axe during Great Barr robbery
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,525
Location
Yorkshire
Having been the victim of a violent home robbery (not burglary as there is a difference), I think the offenders need to go away for a very long time. Having occurred in late 2012, I found out recently that one of the individuals was released in March 2018 - the easy sentences are no deterrent. Considering what they went on to do (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-21256852), we got off lightly in comparison
They do, but the apologists and our disgraceful legal system will ensure that never happens, sadly. It's a total disgrace.
 

OneOffDave

Member
Joined
2 Apr 2015
Messages
453
Whose fault is all this? A homeowner who just went to bed for a normal night’s sleep.

I never said it was anyone's fault. Having dealt with the aftermath of a violent death in a house, trying to get it cleaned appropriately is difficult and expensive.
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
11,145
Location
Redcar
I never said it was anyone's fault. Having dealt with the aftermath of a violent death in a house, trying to get it cleaned appropriately is difficult and expensive.

And if the story is as it seems and the man is rightly cleared, he should not have to pay a penny towards it.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
But as the blog post outlines, a full investigation can only happen once the suspect has been arrested.

This is not just a legal duty, it's practical as well. You need to remove the suspect from the scene, detain them, and collect evidence.

Does there actually have to be a formal arrest though? Maybe the police could just say, "please come with us while we look inside the house for evidence". Having an arrest on your record means you can't visit the USA without applying for a visa. So being arrested has consequences.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,949
Location
Fenny Stratford
They do, but the apologists and our disgraceful legal system will ensure that never happens, sadly. It's a total disgrace.

It seems anyone who doesn't agree with your view is an apologist for criminals. Have you any solutions that might fix the "disgraceful legal system"?

Mine are quite simple: Build more prisons and lock more people away more often and for longer.

To that we need to employ more prison officers, more policemen, more CPS staff, more staff to help with drug and substance issues in prisons, more social workers and out reach staff to help prevent crime and improve lives for those coming out of prison, more prison education staff to help educate people inside and hopefully mean criminals don't need to go back inside.

We also need to increase rates paid to CPS lawyers, employ more CPS lawyers, employ more judges, employ more court staff and increase rates paid to legal aid workers to make sure the court system is fair and robust if only because one day an erstwhile decent person like you or I might find ourselves before the court.

The problem is that costs lots of money that decent people like you and I have to pay for via our taxes. Are you willing to pay for it? It does also mean that an affluent, nice, decent, middle class area like York might have to have a prison or two built nearby. Happy for that to happen also?

I am.

Having been the victim of a violent home robbery (not burglary as there is a difference), I think the offenders need to go away for a very long time. Having occurred in late 2012, I found out recently that one of the individuals was released in March 2018 - the easy sentences are no deterrent.

I agree with you entirely. Offenses of this nature are not taken seriously at present for a multitude of reasons.

EDIT - as always: here is the link to apply to become a magistrate. Apply and start fixing the dreadful system: https://www.gov.uk/become-magistrate/apply-to-be-a-magistrate
 
Last edited:

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,126
Location
Birmingham
I agree with you entirely. Offenses of this nature are not taken seriously at present for a multitude of reasons.

It is made all the more difficult especially since it came to light that the scum who committed ours and the other violent robberies were actually from 5 minutes up the road and friends of friends actually knew them.

For us - they visited us at 7:30pm, smashed our outer front door off its hinges with sledgehammers, smashed the inner front door glass with a sledgehammer giving me a blow to the arm in the process as I was holding the door shut, luckily I had the common sense to ask them what they wanted and unsurprisingly it was my Audi RS4 Avant key. My wife and two young sons were traumatised (as was I, our daughter was out at the time), but during the trial the scum they said the car was insured so they didn't care. That's the problem, they have no consideration to the emotional side of what they do. If it happened to them, they would be the first to complain as it would appear bungling Henry's family have done so
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top