Homeowner Munir Hussain jailed for attacking burglars who tied up family

After about three weeks of English legal system hell and about halfway through what I believe was some sort of preliminary hearing, the Crown dropped the charges. Seems their star witnesses were nowhere to be found.

So your problem wasn't with the courts at all then, it was with the CPS. I will happily agree that the CPS are extremely bad and should shoulder much of the blame that the courts and judges get.
As an example, the recent case of the guy finding the shotgun, the court was exactly right to convict the guy, as it was correct in law. However the CPS should never have brought the case in the first place. They are supposed to only bring cases that are in the public interest, but they seem to forget that a lot of the time.
 
No, the whole system is fucked up.

1. The police should never have referred charges to the CPS. They knew within minutes that I was not the initiator of the incident as apparently they had been watching the whole ten second incident on video and they had apologized profusely to me for being a guest in the UK who had been treated badly. However, shortly after that, I was still (but apologetically) cuffed and stuffed in the back of a tiny fucking police car for the 'evil crime' of merely defending myself.
2. I am not a fully trained martial artist, I hold no belts and in fact entirely dislike unarmed combat. However, I was still assumed to be a "dangerous weapon" as an "obvious martial artist" and was treated the same way someone who had murdered 37 people bare handed in the middle of Bond Street and was likely to Hulk out at any moment would have been, right down to some goddamn leg shackles.
3. Apparently the two assholes who attacked me disappeared shortly after being taken to the hospital, yet the CPS continued to prosecute. Oh, despite the fact that they were wanted in connection with other crimes, that they were out on early parole for their nth offense, and that they were not juveniles, apparently neither the CPS or police thought they were worth holding on to with significant force. But me, the tourist? Who had the balls to defend himself from potential grievous bodily injury or death? Yeah, we're locking your ass up in England.
4. The judge in the case clearly did not believe in the concept of self defense and was apparently stunned that one man, not in that great of shape, could take down two yobs. But when the Crown had to drop the charges, he tried to give them every opening to maintain the charges against me. Cute, huh?

And, of course, my little stay over there cost me quite a bit in income and time. I am unlikely to forget the stupidity that is the English legal system any time soon.

Oh, and your yobs are fucking amateurs. They're letting goddamn anyone into the UK thieves' guild these days - my lesbian friend who is all of 90lbs soaking wet could have taken this pair of 'hardened repeat offenders' with one hand tied behind her back.
 
Last edited:
I unfortunately have had some dealings with the English court system and I was bloody lucky to come out of it without a prison term. Lucky, plus I was able to get a good solicitor and barrister team. The help of the US Embassy was also well timed.

A couple of your idiot yobs thought I would be a soft touch and tried kneecapping me. Let's just say that it didn't go quite the way they thought it would. When the local constable showed up one was trying to figure out when his balls would come back down from orbit and the other one was trying to breathe with my size 12 firmly planted on his throat while I tried to remember what the fuck the UK counterpart to 911 was supposed to be.

Despite the fact that their assault on me was unprovoked, I was charged with your equivalent of 'assault with a deadly weapon' since I was 'obviously a trained martial artist'.

You got to be kidding me...that means you can?t defend yourself, not even EMPTY HANDED?!?

EDIT:
Is it safe to say you never want to go back to England? :lol:
 
Last edited:
You got to be kidding me...that means you can?t defend yourself, not even EMPTY HANDED?!?

EDIT:
Is it safe to say you never want to go back to England? :lol:

I used to go there for fun and recreation (plus Jag parts shopping) as well as for business. Now I keep the business to a minimum and do not visit for fun.

I would love to visit a taping of Top Gear, but there's no fucking way I'm going back to a nation that has that view of self defense if I have any other choice.
 
That is debatable. If he had them tied up, then that counts as harm to me.



No, that would be ridiculous for me to kill you for merely threatening me. But, if you showed up in my front room, holding a gun, a gallon of gasoline and a zippo then I would assume that you where there to carry out your threat.

Except he was fleeing, and other then being tied up no harm was carried out. If you are that concerned about your family then you should stay with them and call the cops, you shouldn't chase after them as you may be attacked yourself and then where is your family?
 
2. I am not a fully trained martial artist, I hold no belts and in fact entirely dislike unarmed combat. However, I was still assumed to be a "dangerous weapon" as an "obvious martial artist" and was treated the same way someone who had murdered 37 people bare handed in the middle of Bond Street and was likely to Hulk out at any moment would have been, right down to some goddamn leg shackles.

It's because you're Asian. EVERYBODY knows that all Asian people are fully trained Bruce-Lee-esque killing machines, trained in at least 5 disciplines of martial art, from birth.
 
4. The judge in the case clearly did not believe in the concept of self defense and was apparently stunned that one man, not in that great of shape, could take down two yobs. But when the Crown had to drop the charges, he tried to give them every opening to maintain the charges against me. Cute, huh?

Can you expand on this? (I'm not doubting you by the way)
 
Last edited:
Can you expand on this? (I'm not doubting you by the way)

Direct quote from the judge: "Is the Crown certain that there are no substantiative charges, however minor, on which to hold this clearly violent man?"
 
Direct quote from the judge: "Is the Crown certain that there are no substantiative charges, however minor, on which to hold this clearly violent man?"

I smell a title.:lol:
Seriously: that is just stupid.
So now YOU are violent, not the dirtbags that attacked you...:rolleyes:

Also, what the hell is "kneecapping"?
 
Kneecapping is when an assailant swings a pipe, baseball bat, or other such object (a length of rebar in this case) at your knee with the intent of smashing your kneecap, thereby either temporarily or permanently disabling you.

This leaves the intended victim on the ground writhing in pain, unable to walk - and at the mercy of the person who kneecapped you. In past days, this could leave someone unable to walk for life if the damage was bad enough. Today, you can get an artificial joint, but even those don't work as well as the originals and the victim will usually be in some level of pain for the rest of their life.
 
You should really take a law class ;)
I'm quite happy with letting the good people of the court who have interpret the law for me. The principle is easy and common for all civilized countries, you may not take the law into your own hands. Hussain has and thereby broken the law. Simple.
 
Spectre, let me get this straight:
They tried to leave you defenseless (possibly limping for the rest of your life), you defended yourself, kicked their asses and YOU are the violent man.
You CLEARLY should have fled and threatened (from a safe distance and not so loud as to disturb the calm and tranquility of others) to write an angry letter to their parents. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
That was apparently the 'correct' course of action, per the British justice system, yes. It is probably obvious why I intensely distrust it at this point. :p
 
Direct quote from the judge: "Is the Crown certain that there are no substantiative charges, however minor, on which to hold this clearly violent man?"

The first part of that is standard procedure. They used to drop charges, but then bring a new charge a few days later, wasting a lot of time and money. If they can just carry on with different charges then they will.
The latter bit however :?
I guess the prosecutor did a "good" job of creating an image of you. A big issue with the courts is that the prosecutors are pretty much permanent fixtures in the court, so they can get quite pally with the judges. I have been in a courtroom where the judge was clearly friendly with the prosecutor but was quite hostile with the defence council.
 
Another point - the two guys who jumped me? No charges were ever brought against them for this incident as best I can tell.

I think I've proven my points regarding the English judicial system.
 
Last edited:
:blink:
Yeah, pretty much...
 
I'm quite happy with letting the good people of the court who have interpret the law for me. The principle is easy and common for all civilized countries, you may not take the law into your own hands. Hussain has and thereby broken the law. Simple.

The reason we have judges, juries, lawyers, and trials, is because it's anything BUT easy to have the law interpreted. Seriously, take a BASIC law 101 class it may help you in the future. Why were having this discussion is because the court system quite often gets it wrong, ESPECIALLY in "civilized" countries

Keep in mind that the jury is made up of average people, who once tried to find out whether or not to convict by way of ouija board.
 
Last edited:
I do not recognize your claim that courts mostly get things wrong but Mr Hussain is free to appeal should that be the case. I see no error in the judgement.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I ever said anything like "get things mostly wrong".... but I certainly don't blindly trust them like you seem to do. In fact, even if you were innocent of a crime I'll bet you'd still get a lawyer for yourself.
 
It's quite interesting that you guys A) don't trust the courts and B) most likely support the death penalty (no? am I wrong?) because those two things don't go together.
 
Top