Householders ‘unlikely’ to be prosecuted for attacking burglars
Householders are extremely unlikely to be prosecuted for attacking burglars in their own home unless they go after them for revenge, the Director of Public Prosecutions said today.
His comments came as the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Crown Prosecution Service published a joint leaflet explaining how people could defend themselves in their own homes.
The Conservatives have published a private members bill which would see householders prosecuted only if they use “grossly disproportionate force”.
But the Government argues that no change in the law is needed and has embarked on a publicity campaign to clarify the current situation.
At the launch, Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald insisted the law that householders can use “reasonable force” did not need to be changed.
As long as they were acting in the heat of the moment and could show they truly believed their actions had been justified at the time, they would not be prosecuted.
He added: “In the past, really, really serious force has been regarded as justified and lawful in this situation.” He cited cases where people had shot burglars, stabbed them in the chest or hit them over the head with an iron bar and not been prosecuted.
A survey of senior prosecutors had turned up only 11 convictions for assaulting burglars in the past fifteen years, and almost all of those had involved some form of retribution.
In one case, a householder had caught the burglar, tied him up, thrown him into a pit and set fire to him.
The decision to issue the leaflets – 100,000 will be printed and displayed in libraries among other places – was motivated by a public perception that the law was not on their side, he added.
“I think that people were beginning to believe that … we routinely prosecute householders who are protecting themselves against burglars. It’s very important for us to send a message out that that does not happen.”
ACPO president Chris Fox rejected suggestions that the law should be changed to say householders could use any force that was not “grossly disproportionate”, saying that the difference between “unreasonable” and “grossly disproportionate” was not clear. Changing the law would simply result in more work for lawyers arguing over the new terminology he said.
But, he acknowledged that some householders who had attacked burglars in self-defence had been questioned as if they were the offender and said he would be writing to all 43 police forces in the country.
However, Mr Fox insisted that householders finding themselves in that situation must be questioned, because information had to be gathered before police and prosecutors could make a judgement.
But, the Conservative Shadow Minister Patrick Mercer – who has tabled the private members bill – said that a leaflet was an inadequate response.
Mr Mercer said: “The idea that the Government can clarify the horrible confusion surrounding this law with a simple leaflet is just nonsense. They need to address this issue much more seriously, not try to bolt the stable door after the horse has fled.
“There are any number of incidences around the country of people that have suffered as a result of this dodgy law. The Government must amend it, as it did in 2003 with the civil law, if it is to prevent further such nonsenses taking place.”
