A hypothetical situation (but one that could easily happen in an urban setting)
I’ d be particularly interested to see a response from any law students who may be reading here..
OK suppose a bunch of people had a large shared house… They were mostly in their 20s-30s, mixed group, who all attended raves and other parties, and did small amounts of recreational drugs at the weekend but worked or attended a place of education during the week.
As you would expect, they have between them got enough cash to buy a few PCs, telly, DVD player, decks, music gear decent hi-fi and other stuff.
Every weekend they tend to have a loud gathering of people playing music, on occasions the Police have attended and told them to turn down the noise.
One of them rather misguidedly invites a random bunch of people over after a party to chill out, amongst whom is a lad (Person A) known to the Police for both drug use,dealing and burglarys of dwellings. He is also a regular crack cocaine user.
Some of the housemates are a bit wary of him but “he’s sorted us out before so he’s alright”, although there is one chap in the house with whom he’s never got on with as they have always mistrusted one another.
This chap (person B) is from an ethnic minority, slightly shyer and more reserved than the others (although he has occasionally used drugs, and has one formal adult caution for posession from some years back, which scared him into cutting down his drug use drastically). He has no other dealings with the criminal justice system and no history of using violence.
He raves occasionally but spends more time making music on equipment he purchased but has been installed in a communal music room in the basement for the use of all in the house. B sometimes also plays cricket, and keeps his cricket kit in his room, although he only plays for fun as he is short-sighted.
After the chillout session, A departs and everyone retires to bed. B is having difficulty sleeping, due to earlier consumption of stimulants (he hasn’t done that for a while, hence the greater effect)
A later returns and breaks into the house by an insecure door, with the intention of stealing some of the music equipment to sell for drugs.
B is awakened by the noise. He picks up his cricket bat, and goes downstairs without putting on his spectacles (which he earlier mislaid).
He rushes into the basement, sees a figure their and swings the cricket bat – only aiming at the moving figure and unsure due to his eyesight of where the bat may land. The bat fractures A’s skull and he falls to the ground.
Meanwhile, a young lady (C) living in a room above hears the commotion and dials 999 on her mobile. The Police attend; an Ambulance is called but paramedics pronounce A’s life extinct.
B is arrested on suspicion of murder and detained at the Police Station, to be interviewed later by CID. As he is very jumpy initially and the cops say “they are always having parties at that house” a force doctor suspects he has taken class A drugs, and pronounces “not fit to interview until effect of these drugs has worn off” (i.e 12 hours bang up in cells!)
Now you would think this is a clear-cut case of self-defence but…
- when cops attended A hadn’t managed to nick anything yet; all they saw was B with a cricket bat standing over A’s body.
- the girl who called 999 (C) (perhaps not realising the implications of this statement) says in passing “A and B never liked each other”
- the house had a “reputation” as mentioned above for noisy parties.
- although B has difficulty signing his custody form the cops think its because of drugs affecting his vision, not that he can’t see the damn forms!
- B was also worried previously that A was “cracking on” to C – although B and C are not in a relationship they were very good friends and B was always worried about C’s welfare. She also tells the cops this..
- B is not white. A is. B went to comprehensive school but did relatively well in studies, whilst A went to fee paying school but “went bad”. It is a predominantly middle class white suburb in SE England where this incident happens.
Can anyone see the makings of a big miscarriage of justice here, despite our “englishmans home is his castle” laws?
