Fazer Owners Club - Unofficial
General => General => Topic started by: Grahamm on 06 November 2020, 05:41:29 pm
-
Ok, this one is already on the Facebook forum, but it's very difficult to follow all the different conversations on there, so hopefully we can discuss it reasonably here.
Theft victim charged with murder after ramming thief off his motorcycle (https://www.visordown.com/news/general/theft-victim-charged-murder-after-ramming-thief-his-motorcycle)
THE victim of a motorcycle theft has been charged with murder after ramming two motorcycle thieves from his motorcycle as they tried to escape.
First of all, I'd like to ask that, despite how people feel, we keep this discussion civil and avoid ill-tempered comments.
The short version is that the biker heard someone trying to steal his motorcycle, chased after them in his car and rammed them twice, the second impact causing the thieves to be knocked off the bike, one dying after hitting a lamp post and the second suffering serious injuries.
It should also be mentioned that the biker then left the scene and other members of the public then had to help the injured people.
Now, whilst some people may be thinking "they deserved it" or "serves them right" or "I'd do the same", there are few points that need to be made. (NB I follow The Secret Barrister on Twitter who often explains how the newspaper headlines and stories about cases like these are often exaggerated or distorted and don't necessarily represent the facts correctly).
So, a few points...
1) Obviously, theft is wrong.
2) You have the right to use "reasonable force" to defend yourself and your property if it or you are at risk.
3) Using a car to chase people and knock them off a motorcycle most probably does not come under the heading of "reasonable".
4) Taking the law into your own hands is generally frowned upon.
5) Whilst the headline says the prosecution are calling for a murder charge, it's unlikely that such a charge would actually be proven as it would be necessary to demonstrate intent to kill.
6) Because he left the scene, presumably he was aware that what he had done, so it's very unlikely he'd get off completely. Most likely the charge will be reduced to manslaughter and he'd probably be best to make a guilty plea before it goes to court to get the maximum reduction in sentence.
7) Yes, certain members of the Police are authorised to use "Tactical contact" to stop stolen bikes, however they are *trained* for this and to evaluate the best way to do it in a way that causes least danger.
8 ) No matter what you think of bike thieves, the penalty for theft is not murder, so please, no lynch mob style comments about "they deserved it" or "if more people did this, there would be fewer bike thefts".
9) The Prosecution are trying to get their case out into the public domain and media, unfortunately the Defence can't generally do the same. That's just how the system works.
There's probably more, but that covers a fair few things that will come up.
-
There ain't no jury in the land that will convict him of murder.
Its right - you can shoot an intruder in the face but you can not shoot them in the back as they run off. (shoot - so to speak )
-
I suspect he will be found guilty of manslaughter as he did not set out to kill.
Tony Martin is an example of why the law of this land gets it wrong sometimes though.
-
.
-
Surely the prosecution can only allege that he deliberately rammed his own motorcycle? Dont they have to prove that beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Sounds like a tragic accident to me - just as if some lowlife grabbed my phone in the street and as I chased him he got ran over by a bus.
-
Be interesting to know if the surviving rider is charged with theft, riding without a helmet etc
-
I suspect he will be found guilty of manslaughter as he did not set out to kill.
Tony Martin is an example of why the law of this land gets it wrong sometimes though.
Shooting someone who is facing you *could* be argued as self defence.
Shooting someone in the back from a distance who is running away from you and trying to get through a window (and then lying about it) is murder.
In any case, that's off topic for this discussion.
-
Sounds like a tragic accident to me - just as if some lowlife grabbed my phone in the street and as I chased him he got ran over by a bus.
The difference is whether he fell under the bus or you *pushed* him under the bus (and whether you legged it afterwards)...
-
Be interesting to know if the surviving rider is charged with theft, riding without a helmet etc
Probably he will be.
(BTW Riding without a helmet is, IIRC, a £30 fixed penalty, no points)
-
Point 8 counts me out of posting in this thread
:woot
-
Be interesting to know if the surviving rider is charged with theft, riding without a helmet etc
Probably he will be.
(BTW Riding without a helmet is, IIRC, a £30 fixed penalty, no points)
that's cheaper than buying a helmet
-
.
-
I suspect he will be found guilty of manslaughter as he did not set out to kill.
Tony Martin is an example of why the law of this land gets it wrong sometimes though.
Shooting someone who is facing you *could* be argued as self defence.
Shooting someone in the back from a distance who is running away from you and trying to get through a window (and then lying about it) is murder.
In any case, that's off topic for this discussion.
You seem to have decided in your own mind what you want people to say or not say?
That's not a discussion is it?
Thieves, burglars, murderers, rapists, etc, are all the lowest of the low in my mind that can deeply hurt or even wreck peoples lives, so if it goes badly wrong for them or they get their comeuppance every so often, then.........tough titties. :smokin
As for the driver, as much as i hate to say it, he was in the wrong as he went out of his way for vengeance, but heat of the moment anger can do that to a person. Not sure about a clean cut murder charge, because as you say it wasn't premeditated at all, just an over reactive response that ended badly. Death as a result of dangerous driving maybe, along with the GBH charge which will probably stick.
They will have to take into account that none of this would've happened if the two thieving scrotebags had not nicked his bike in the first place, so they are still a victim of their own actions. All depends on how good his defence liar is.
The poor sod has to live with smashing his own bike up too. :\
-
Not sure what type of Honda it was......but he paid £450 for it. :groan
Again though, it should be about the value to the owner, theft is still theft.
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/joshua-molloy-murder-newcastle-live-19217509 (https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/joshua-molloy-murder-newcastle-live-19217509)
-
I suspect he will be found guilty of manslaughter as he did not set out to kill.
Tony Martin is an example of why the law of this land gets it wrong sometimes though.
Shooting someone who is facing you *could* be argued as self defence.
Shooting someone in the back from a distance who is running away from you and trying to get through a window (and then lying about it) is murder.
In any case, that's off topic for this discussion.
Or could be considered instant justice. Either way, in that paticular case, they were convicted crims out to steal .
In the case of the bike thieves, I have no idea what their past was but suspect that they had some practice at stealing bikes haveing managed to do it relatively quickly. I am not condoning the way that the owner allegedly dealt with it. Maybe he did intend to do them some damage, maybe he just nudged the bike to knock them off. The fact the scumbags were not wearing helmets was their own fault IMHO.
I hope the surviving one gets some decent prison time and the owner pleads guilty to manslaughter with a minimum punishment.
-
Or could be considered instant justice.
I suggest you look up the meaning of the word "Justice".
I hope the surviving one gets some decent prison time and the owner pleads guilty to manslaughter with a minimum punishment.
That will probably be what happens. Done according to the law and via the courts.
That's justice.
-
:uhuh It beginning to dawn on me - what the FOC was the point of you starting this thread.
-
The fact the scumbags were not wearing helmets was their own fault IMHO.
That was exactly the utterly stupendous reason the police would not chase bike thieves in the past, now in London at least it doesn't matter. You steal a bike prepared to be rammed off by the police if you fail to stop, period.
These boys pretending to men stopped being considered fellow members of society and lost any and all privileges when the stole the bike, and they were belligerently arrogant enough to do it with no crash helmet on. I concede the following will be controversial in language and sentiment, but I have zero fucks to give to the two little cunts.
-
Fenham driver accused of ramming stolen motorbike found not guilty of murdering Joshua Molloy (https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/fenham-driver-accused-ramming-stolen-19274578)
Mihai Dinisoae, of Fenham, has been cleared of murdering Joshua Molloy and causing GBH with intent
[...]
[The Jury] failed to reach a verdict on the alternative charge of manslaughter and were discharged.
Dinisoae, 32, of Baldwin Avenue, Fenham, was further remanded in custody and the case will be mentioned again in two weeks.
So, unsurprisingly, the murder charge didn't stick, nor did the Jury think that he'd committed GBH with intent to kill.
He's not out of the woods yet, because they couldn't agree a verdict on the manslaughter charge, so he may well face a retrial on that.
-
!WOW! really suprised at that,I thought they'd find with manslaughter,I personally hope he somehow gets off because I really think it was just the red mist and the fact that his bike was an old cheap one tells you he hadn't got a lot to start with so it probably meant a lot to him and he just wanted to get it back,I don't think for a second he thought anyone would get seriously hurt let alone killed,just a tragic outcome because scum or not they're someones son/brother,mate. :(
-
the point everyone is missing, is that members of the jury will decide on his fate and chances are, if there's bikers on that jury then they'll be doing their utmost to get him off
as someone who's done jury service, let me explain what you're up against
I had a paedo case, before we'd even sat down in the ante room, a grandmother on the jury said he's guilty.....I've got grandkids and we don't want him on the streets. As you can imagine.....the rest of us were shocked. We hadn't even gone into the courtroom to hear his name and she was adamant he was going down.
the defence QC was ok but the prosecution was QC was shit, got names, streets mixed up etc....so much so that I thought he was deliberately trying to catch out the witness but it continued.....he was just incompetent
2nd case was similar and to my surprise I thought they'd be on remand but the pair of them travelled in by train each day. Even as the judge took our guilty verdict, he addressed them in the dock and told them to report back to court after xmas for sentencing. I couldn't believe what I was witnessing.....I though they were being sent down on the spot
another mate had a young lad on the jury who said, I don't know much about life coz I'm young....I'll just go with the flow
I often wonder how many innocent/guilty people are in gaol or let off coz of jury members leanings
-
the point everyone is missing, is that members of the jury will decide on his fate and chances are, if there's bikers on that jury then they'll be doing their utmost to get him off
as someone who's done jury service, let me explain what you're up against
I had a paedo case, before we'd even sat down in the ante room, a grandmother on the jury said he's guilty.....I've got grandkids and we don't want him on the streets. As you can imagine.....the rest of us were shocked. We hadn't even gone into the courtroom to hear his name and she was adamant he was going down.
the defence QC was ok but the prosecution was QC was shit, got names, streets mixed up etc....so much so that I thought he was deliberately trying to catch out the witness but it continued.....he was just incompetent
2nd case was similar and to my surprise I thought they'd be on remand but the pair of them travelled in by train each day. Even as the judge took our guilty verdict, he addressed them in the dock and told them to report back to court after xmas for sentencing. I couldn't believe what I was witnessing.....I though they were being sent down on the spot
another mate had a young lad on the jury who said, I don't know much about life coz I'm young....I'll just go with the flow
I often wonder how many innocent/guilty people are in gaol or let off coz of jury members leanings
I totally understand where you're coming from.
I've been called twice to do jury service, a few years apart, and it is amazing how you can make an initial presumption but then after hearing the evidence you find yourself being completely wrong.
And it only takes a dominant member of a jury who is more vocal than the others to try and take control and it can all go the way of their thinking.
I'll never forget during one case in the jury room one of the jurors said out loud "Can we hurry this up, i need to do my washing."
The bloke in court was looking at 3 years if found guilty.
I was not impressed and told him straight.
There were also 3 jurors who took no notes and could barely speak English either.
On these 2 incidents alone if I ever found myself in court I would have to plead not guilty in the hope that the jury were as incompetent as these few were.
-
Got a feeling that its going to turn out that the "biker" in the car has a past.
-
Something else. Anyone ever come across their local "live" website -every region has one and they all follow the same layout and format - they are total sh1t full of fake news and lies and clickbate here is one referring to this case https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/buzz-joshua-molloy-newbiggin-crash-18256699 (https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/buzz-joshua-molloy-newbiggin-crash-18256699)
They say
"A mural paying tribute to biker Joshua Molloy who lost his life in a motorcycle crash has appeared on a pub wall".
They make it sound like he is totally innocent, no mention whatso ever that he was stealing the bike.
-
I believe that he was sentenced to ten years in prison on the manslaughter charge
-
I believe that he was sentenced to ten years in prison on the manslaughter charge
He looks as much of a crim and Maloy and his reckless driving doesnt change that impression.
-
- a grandmother on the jury said he's guilty.....I've got grandkids and we don't want him on the streets.
- There were also 3 jurors who took no notes and could barely speak English either.
Ive seen both of the above, jury of peers we are told... like f*ck. "A mural paying tribute to biker Joshua Molloy who lost his life in a motorcycle crash has appeared on a pub wall".
Complain to Newcastle council - https://envirocall.newcastle.gov.uk/home/Report
-
I believe that he was sentenced to ten years in prison on the manslaughter charge
He looks as much of a crim and Maloy and his reckless driving doesnt change that impression.
That's kind of irrelevant though isn't it?
As you well know, the reason they don't disclose previous criminal history to jurors is because they don't want their opinions immediately swayed by their past.
Just because you may have murdered 9 people before doesn't make you immediately guilty of an accused 10th by default.
In this case he was initially the victim, which in turn then understandably enraged him, irrespective of what kind of nutjob he already was and had been in the past, which i don't dispute at all by the way.
-
I believe that he was sentenced to ten years in prison on the manslaughter charge
That sounds a lot to me. Its not like he reversed and had another go.
Wonder if he will be deported back to Romania when he gets released after 5 years.