Householders can attack and even kill intruders in defence of their home, new
guidelines make clear.
People risk prosecution only if they step over the line to retribution or
revenge or set a trap to hurt or kill an intruder.
The “licence to kill” guidelines, where people do what they “honestly and
instinctively believe is necessary”, have been drawn up to reassure the
public over the force they can use when facing intruders.
People can use objects as weapons, such as a bat, knife or gun, and almost any
level of violence against a burglar could be acceptable in the right
situation, Ken Macdonald, QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said.
The Government has ruled out a change in the law despite calls to do so,
including one from the Tories — who want the concept of “reasonable force”
replaced by “grossly disproportionate” — after consultation with the
Director of Public Prosecutions and the Association of Chief Police Officers
(Acpo).
Ministers have decided, after concerns triggered by the case of Tony Martin,
the Norfolk farmer jailed for killing a burglar, that the law is not
properly understood.
The guidelines leaflet from the Crown Prosecution Service and Acpo aims to end
confusion over the point at which defending one’s family and property
becomes a crime. Even using items as weapons would not lead to prosecution
if householders were doing what they “honestly and instinctively” believed
was necessary “in the heat of the moment”, it says.
The leaflet, to go to Citizens Advice Bureaux and police forces in England and
Wales, adds: “You are not expected to make fine judgments over the level of
force you use in the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you
honestly and instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment,
that would be the strongest evidence of you acting lawfully and in
self-defence.
“This is still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon.”
Fear is a factor, the leaflet says. The “more extreme the circumstances and
fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence”.
The leaflet also points out that householders do not have to wait to be
attacked before they use violence themselves. “If you have acted in
reasonable self defence . . . and the intruder dies, you will still have
acted lawfully.”
But they are warned that if they cross the line into revenge, retribution or
setting a deliberate trap, they can still face the courts. Chris Fox, the
Acpo president, said officers would have to be satisfied that ”reasonable
force” had not been overstepped. “There has to be a line, otherwise we
develop into anarchy,” he said. “However, that line is quite a long way
towards the householder. People will be questioned about what happened.
There is going to be statement-taking and interviewing.”
Mr Macdonald said: “The law is on the side of householders. Even where
householders have badly injured or even killed burglars, the CPS has
declined to prosecute unless they have used wholly excessive force.”
He added: “My impression is that people were beginning to believe that we
routinely prosecute householders who have protected themselves against
burglars. That is completely untrue.”
Almost any level of violence against a burglar could be acceptable in the
right situation, he said. “The key thing to bear in mind is that, as long as
someone hasn’t stepped over that line into retribution or revenge, it is
quite difficult to perceive of a level of violence that would not be
regarded as reasonable by a prosecutor.
“This is something the intruder brings on him or herself. I don’t think we
need to be too squeamish about the situation.”
There have been examples of householders not being prosecuted after intruders
had been fatally stabbed or shot, or hit over the head with bats or metal
bars, he added.
Mr Macdonald said that the CPS had brought only 11 prosecutions against
householders in 15 years, including one in which a burglar was tied up,
thrown into a pit and set alight.
He also made clear that, having been the victim of many burglaries — including
four in one year at an East London home — he would not hesitate to
incapacitate a burglar.
Once he, his wife and children had been sleeping. If he had encountered a man
or two men in his kitchen, he said, he would have used force. “I would have
thought of my children . . . I may be attacked, he may attack me and then go
upstairs and I would not be prepared to have that happen.”
THE CLUEDO GUIDELINES
Colonel Mustard awakes to find a burglar standing by his
bedside — he reaches for a length of lead piping, strikes out and knocks him
unconscious or kills him.
Lawful
Miss Scarlett hears noises in the night. She creeps
downstairs and sees a burglar in her dining room. He has not seen her. She
seizes a candlestick, hides behind the door and strikes him unconscious.
Lawful
The Rev Green is woken by the noise of a burglar making his
escape. He races after him and and with the butt of his revolver knocks him
unconscious to the ground.
Lawful
Mrs White disturbs a burglar in the library. She seizes a
knife in the kitchen and stabs him. He falls to the ground and is rapidly
becoming unconscious. Just to teach him a lesson she stabs him again.
Unlawful
Professor Plum hears on the grapevine that a man he suspects
of thefts from his house is planning forced entry through the kitchen. He
lies in wait to trap the burglar and then shoots him or knocks him
unconscious.
Unlawful
Mrs Peacock disturbs burglars in the billiard room. They flee
empty-handed. She chases after them with a shotgun and shoots one of them
dead.
Unlawful
THE NEW ADVICE
What is ‘reasonable force’?
You are not expected to make fine judgments over the level of force you use in
the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you honestly and
instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment, that would be
the strongest evidence of your acting lawfully and in self-defence. This is
still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon. The more extreme
the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in
self-defence.
What if the intruder dies?
If you have acted in reasonable self-defence and the intruder dies,you will
still have acted lawfully.
When would my actions not be lawful?
If having knocked someone unconscious you decided to hurt them further or kill
them to punish them; or you knew of an intended intruder and set a trap to
hurt or kill.
What if I chase them as they run off?
You are no longer acting in self-defence and the same degree of force may not
be reasonable. You are still allowed to use reasonable force to recover your
property and make a citizen’s arrest.
Do I have to wait to be attacked?
No, not if you are in your own home and in fear for yourself or others.
