THIS story is yet again, another shocking example of how the law works in favour of criminals and against ordinary law abiding people.
You will note that the two men who were attempting to break in to the building "were not charged".
How about bringing charges against the people attempting to break in to a building rather than spending three months trying to get evidence against a disabled man who did nothing wrong ?
2 comments:
It does sound like a bit of an overreaction to me too, especially the bit with the helicopters, but I do like the idea that if someone shoots people -- even if they themselves did something wrong, even if the shooter claimed to have aimed at a fox -- then this is seriously investigated. The thing is, either he did see the people, in which case he possibly over-reacted, or he didn't, in which case shooting at 'foxes' wasn't a very safe thing to do!
The fact that the other men were released without charge sounds wrong, but is unrelated.
I notice the police were notified by the doctors, not the two burglars.
Fairly obviously, we can`t know what account the two men themselves gave, or indeed whether they actually gave any information at all. Even if they co-operated, then in all likelihood they gave an accunt that included the words "drugs" and "guns".
Under those circumstances, I think the response was probably proportionate.
Or is it one law for some and another for others ?
I notice the journalist seems to have relied entirely on the account of a single source, which has apparently been accepted without question.
I`d never do that.
Post a Comment