Homeowner Munir Hussain jailed for attacking burglars who tied up family

wooflepoof

Watermelon Connoisseur
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
5,047
Location
Texas
Car(s)
Genesis Sedan 3.8
Good decision regarding the homeowner. He was not acting in self defence or to protect his property. There is no justification for how far he took it.
Do the people defending him believe that you should be allowed to do anything to a man who has broken into your property but is no longer a threat to you? It certainly sounds like it and that is a very scary attitude to have.
I'm confident that any civilised country (including the US) would reach a similar conclusion in this case. I would be amazed if anyone could find a recent similar case where there was no charges.

Not necessarily ANYTHING, rigging him up to a contraption ala Saw IV would be off limits. And waterboarding I guess.

I prefer self defense in which the fuckdick has no chance to get up and turn the tables. Especially in the case where its not just my property that's in jeopardy
 

Crazyjeeper

NickGyver
DONOR
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
7,984
Location
Dallas, TX
Car(s)
F150, CJ7, Mustang GT, Tenere, Griso
Good decision regarding the homeowner. He was not acting in self defence or to protect his property. There is no justification for how far he took it.
Do the people defending him believe that you should be allowed to do anything to a man who has broken into your property but is no longer a threat to you? It certainly sounds like it and that is a very scary attitude to have.
I'm confident that any civilised country (including the US) would reach a similar conclusion in this case. I would be amazed if anyone could find a recent similar case where there was no charges.

A person who has made a conscious decision to attempt to harm me or my family is no longer a threat when they are in a chilled drawer at the morgue. I really have no sympathy when multiple offender gets offed by his intended next victim.

A person gives up his right to his own life by trying to take away mine.
 

Cucciolotto

Active Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
142
A person who has made a conscious decision to attempt to harm me or my family is

I'm no Ghandi and I understand where you're coming from BUT you make the assumption it is a conscious decision. What if that man had for instance been mentally retarded and had been talked into it?
Think about the attempted suicide bombing in an Exeter restaurant last year. At first it was clear: it was a muslim kamikaze. And then... it was revealed the man was a British man, a loner with learning difficulties who had been brainwashed. These things happen I'm afraid. Just like tramps being paid to fight in these vile videos on the net.:(

You and I are not the law I'm afraid, there are courts and judges for that. And as Cold Fussion just said, he went way beyond his self protection.

Having said that why would the small time crook stay out of jail is also beyond me.
 

wooflepoof

Watermelon Connoisseur
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
5,047
Location
Texas
Car(s)
Genesis Sedan 3.8
I'm no Ghandi and I understand where you're coming from BUT you make the assumption it is a conscious decision. What if that man had for instance been mentally retarded and had been talked into it?

Yes that's a very typical case indeed and worth my consideration when someone is THREATENING MY PROPERTY FAMILY. The person is obviously retarded for breaking into my house in the first place. Especially here in Texas.
 

Peter3hg

Forum Addict
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
5,949
Location
Manchester, UK
Car(s)
Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Honda Hornet CB600S
Wow, I never guessed that so many civilised people still think that vigilantism is acceptable.
Nobody has an issue with him chasing the guy and tackling him to the ground. A few hits to make sure would also be likely to be fine. However a sustained attack with multiple weapons, while other people are pleading you to stop, on an immobile and defenceless man cannot be justified. This guy went so far beyond the line, he can't even begin to claim it was self defence.
Your case is not the same Spectre. The guy in your case threatened to return and kill them. No such threats were made, or pleaded in this case.
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
Wow, I never guessed that so many civilised people still think that vigilantism is acceptable.
Nobody has an issue with him chasing the guy and tackling him to the ground. A few hits to make sure would also be likely to be fine. However a sustained attack with multiple weapons, while other people are pleading you to stop, on an immobile and defenceless man cannot be justified. This guy went so far beyond the line, he can't even begin to claim it was self defence.
Your case is not the same Spectre. The guy in your case threatened to return and kill them. No such threats were made, or pleaded in this case.

Really?

Munir Hussain and his wife and three children returned from their local mosque during Ramadan to find three intruders, wearing balaclavas, in their home.

The family members? hands were tied behind their backs and they were forced to crawl from room to room. Hussain, chairman of the Asian Business Council, was told that he would be killed, but made his escape after throwing a coffee table and enlisted his brother Tokeer in chasing the offenders down the street in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, bringing one of them to the ground.

Okay. These people know where he lives, were waiting in ambush, and told him that they were going to kill him.

They flee, sure... but what's stopping them from coming back that night and killing the Hussain family, hm?? Not really different from the other case after all.

What is unsaid in the article is whether or not the apprehended scumbag looked like he was still reaching for his knife. If he was, there isn't even a shadow of a problem with the beating. You apply force until the threat stops - if he's still attempting to reach for a weapon, continue the beating until he stops. However, this is speculation as nothing seems to have been written about it one way or the other.

As for vigilantism... I suggest you check out the history of what most Europeans think is one of the more 'civilized' US cities, San Francisco. Specifically, the "Committee Of Vigilance".

The man chased him down the street and then procceded to smash his skull into peices, thats going far beyond ensuring your safety.

Nope. Not in my opinion. It was simply ensuring that the bastard who ambushed you in your own home, tied up your family and stated his intention to do so does not come back and murder you in your sleep at a later date.
 
Last edited:

Peter3hg

Forum Addict
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
5,949
Location
Manchester, UK
Car(s)
Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Honda Hornet CB600S
Okay. These people know where he lives, were waiting in ambush, and told him that they were going to kill him.

They flee, sure... but what's stopping them from coming back that night and killing the Hussain family, hm??

The fact he had apprehended the man. How was almost killing him going to put him in any less danger than phoning the police and getting them to arrest the man? As I said, nobody has an issue with him chasing and tackling the man. That is all that is needed in your scenario.

Although it doesn't mention it in the linked article, the man was a burglar, there was no suggestion that he was waiting in ambush or had any intention to actually kill them. The family simply walked in on a burglary.

Ignore that, it appears the report I heard on the radio was incorrect.
 
Last edited:

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
The man chased him down the street and then procceded to smash his skull into peices, thats going far beyond ensuring your safety.

The fact he had apprehended the man. How was almost killing him going to put him in any less danger than phoning the police and getting them to arrest the man? As I said, nobody has an issue with him chasing and tackling the man. That is all that is needed in your scenario.
Although it doesn't mention it in the linked article, the man was a burglar, there was no suggestion that he was waiting in ambush or had any intention to actually kill them. The family simply walked in on a burglary.

Okay, but the article still contains a report that yes, the burglars stated that they actually did intend to kill them. You know as well as I do that even if the local constabulary had collected him, he would have been out in time for tea. After all, it was 'only' a burglary. And it wasn't like anyone had died or anything, eh, guvnor?

Whereupon it is entirely likely he would have rung up his mates and made a return visit to either get revenge or off witnesses.

Something else here - in Texas, it wouldn't have really mattered all that much in the overall picture as we are allowed to use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon. Cricket bat, .45 ACP headshot, it really doesn't matter. Dead is dead.

Perhaps he might have gone a tad overboard in the amount of force, but we don't know if the guy kept trying to go for his knife. If so, or he reasonably believed so, there isn't a jury in Texas that would convict this man.
 
Last edited:

Twerp128

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
3,664
Location
Indiana
Car(s)
'91 Miata, '09 Street Triple
I'm no Ghandi and I understand where you're coming from BUT you make the assumption it is a conscious decision. What if that man had for instance been mentally retarded and had been talked into it?
Think about the attempted suicide bombing in an Exeter restaurant last year. At first it was clear: it was a muslim kamikaze. And then... it was revealed the man was a British man, a loner with learning difficulties who had been brainwashed. These things happen I'm afraid. Just like tramps being paid to fight in these vile videos on the net.:(

You and I are not the law I'm afraid, there are courts and judges for that. And as Cold Fussion just said, he went way beyond his self protection.

Having said that why would the small time crook stay out of jail is also beyond me.

I know people who have had parents killed, been raped, had druggie parents, etc. You take responsibilities for your actions, regardless of how fortune has treated you in life. That sort of self-indulgent thinking is why they're a criminal in the first place. There is always someone worse off, with how many convictions this guy had, society is better off with him as vegetable. Branson, Churchill, Einstein all had learning disabilities, the reason they were able to rise above them is because they weren't allowed sympathy, it was either progress or fall off.
 
Last edited:

Peter3hg

Forum Addict
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
5,949
Location
Manchester, UK
Car(s)
Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Honda Hornet CB600S
Okay, but the article still contains a report that yes, the burglars stated that they actually did intend to kill them. You know as well as I do that even if the local constabulary had collected him, he would have been out in time for tea. After all, it was 'only' a burglary. And it wasn't like anyone had died or anything, eh, guvnor?

Absolute bollocks. Making ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims to aid your argument helps nobody.
If the police had arrested him, he would not have seen the light of day for a long time. Aggravated burglary is a serious crime, carrying a hefty sentence. He would not have been granted bail.

Perhaps he might have gone a tad overboard in the amount of force, but we don't know if the guy kept trying to go for his knife. If so, or he reasonably believed so, there isn't a jury in Texas that would convict this man.

Neither would any jury in the UK, but why are we talking about random facts that didn't happen? The defence would have used the fact, and they didn't, so it didn't happen.
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
Absolute bollocks. Making ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims to aid your argument helps nobody.
If the police had arrested him, he would not have seen the light of day for a long time. Aggravated burglary is a serious crime, carrying a hefty sentence. He would not have been granted bail.

So, what had he been convicted of 50 times before? And if he was supposed to get a hefty sentence for those, why was he on the street????


Neither would any jury in the UK, but why are we talking about random facts that didn't happen? The defence would have used the fact, and they didn't, so it didn't happen.

Sometimes you get an incompetent defense attorney, too. :p
 

thevictor390

Teen Wankeler
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
11,894
Location
Massachusetts
Car(s)
'17 Mazda MX-5 RF, '89 Toyota Blizzard SX5
No one here witnessed the crime or trial, or can tell what "would" have happened.

I can say that although yes, if the savage beating took place as described it may have been "too far" according to law, under some circumstances it would have been understandable, or even justified (as Spectre said, if the burglar was still resisting). Either way, there are still two men out there that have threatened to kill the victim's family, and now have a vegetable friend to avenge. What is going to be done about that?
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,266
Wow, I never guessed that so many civilised people still think that vigilantism is acceptable.

You know, you're right. The homeowner should have just let the burglar go and then cross his finger that he didn't come back to kill the entire family. Actually, he shouldn't have escaped to begin with and should have just prayed that the murder threat was not real :rolleyes: Why on earth did this moron think its ok to defend yourself and your family? How is hurting a convicted fellon a better solution than just letting him kill your family?







:wall:
 

BlaRo

Little Nudger
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
18,177
Location
Brooklyn
Car(s)
Moto Guzzi V7 Special, Saab 900 Turbo
I'm no Ghandi and I understand where you're coming from BUT you make the assumption it is a conscious decision. What if that man had for instance been mentally retarded and had been talked into it?
Think about the attempted suicide bombing in an Exeter restaurant last year. At first it was clear: it was a muslim kamikaze. And then... it was revealed the man was a British man, a loner with learning difficulties who had been brainwashed. These things happen I'm afraid. Just like tramps being paid to fight in these vile videos on the net.:(

That's true. In fact, next time somebody breaks into my house and ties up my family, I should sit them down on the settee, make them a nice warm cup of Sumatra chai, and discuss his feelings and childhood upbringing that led him to wield a knife and threaten me and my loved ones in the first place. And then I would probably get arrested by a "community peace officer" for not accommodating the would-be criminal sufficiently enough to match Health and Safety regulations.

After all, isn't that what passes for being a man and defending your castle these days?

A person gives up his right to his own life by trying to take away mine.

This.
 

salle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
1,084
Location
Sweden
When 4 guys are smashing an unarmed(?) guys head in while he's on the ground that is in no way defence.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,266
When 4 guys are smashing an unarmed(?) guys head in while he's on the ground that is in no way defence.

Pretty sure that it was two guys that chased him down. And I also really doubt that the perp was unarmed - he was the one threatening to kill them, remember?
 

Crazyjeeper

NickGyver
DONOR
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
7,984
Location
Dallas, TX
Car(s)
F150, CJ7, Mustang GT, Tenere, Griso
When 4 guys are smashing an unarmed(?) guys head in while he's on the ground that is in no way defence.

That is called ensuring that the threat is no longer present, and that the threat cannot return at a later date to commit the previously intended crime.

Maybe I'm just barbaric, but if I was a criminal and the guy I was robbing simply called the cops after catching me, I'd want to get even with him for making me sit in jail. Dead criminals don't commit crimes anymore.
 

Peter3hg

Forum Addict
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
5,949
Location
Manchester, UK
Car(s)
Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Honda Hornet CB600S
You know, you're right. The homeowner should have just let the burglar go and then cross his finger that he didn't come back to kill the entire family. Actually, he shouldn't have escaped to begin with and should have just prayed that the murder threat was not real :rolleyes: Why on earth did this moron think its ok to defend yourself and your family? How is hurting a convicted fellon a better solution than just letting him kill your family?

If you are going to be ridiculous and twist everything I have said in this thread, then I refuse to comment.


So, what had he been convicted of 50 times before? And if he was supposed to get a hefty sentence for those, why was he on the street????

No idea. The issue of lenient sentencing is a separate issue and best left out of this thread.
As an interesting aside, it appears that there may have been some other factors that weren't reported in the main media. One of Hussain's "accomplices" was heard to say "Who has sent you?" which suggests there is more to the story than meets the eye.
 
Last edited:
Top