On camera- Shocking Manchester assault on woman in Bentayga

[anonymous-user]

i think in any situation like this, in you run the perps over or killed them you should be vindicated, we have too much of a liberal stance in this matter. yes i know these things can be replaced but you work to earn nice things you should be able to protect them as well.

[Cold]

I suppose it depends on the velocity at which you engaged the scrote with the front of your car. Lots of mph could involve a splat of fatal amounts, whereas a walking speed nudge close to and parallel with the Bentley would still push the hoodie out of the way but is unlikely to harm their fragile and compensation hungry person.

[birdcage]

Those morons would have probably got 500 for her watch from their friendly local crime lord

That’s a lot of hassle for 500 between them.

[James_B]

When I’m out in London in a car nice enough to get attention I don’t pull up right behinfpd the car in front in traffic. I leave a few metres, enough that I could move back and forth a bit if someone came and tried breaking in.

On the scooter (just as likely to be the focus of an attack, given how useful it is to criminals) I tend to roll up to the lights if possible, not come to a total stop.

It’s sad that it feels like the sort of thing worth thinking about.

[anonymous-user]

cptsideways said:

What would be the legal ramifications if one were to have driven directly into the perps, perhaps even killing them & if there was no dashcam at hand?

Would it be an automatic charge of manslaughter or attempted murder? what is the legal situation. A bit like the many moped muggings that are going on, if they are armed can you use defence of an individual as just cause?

It’s going to heavily depend on the reasoning and justification of the person doing the running over.

Force has to be reasonable in the circumstances. However, force is a very subjective thing. What one person perceives and feels can be entirely different to another.

Whose to say what was going on inside a person’s head? Appropriate legal advice can help a person articulate their reasoning.

“I saw them using weapons I honestly thought they were trying to kill the driver and if I didn’t act like I did that they would die. I ran into them because it was the only immediate thing I could do to stop them and save their life. My intention was to stop them. Not cause them serious harm.”

Etc etc.

[Oilchange]

I think thats a bit of an assumption. To justify using the most extreme force, one has to prove that it was the last resort, if the person was about to have their head stoved in by an axe, arguably you could use extreme or lethal force to protect that persons life. ‘I honestly believed the person would have been killed had I not run the attacker over’ etc...

exgtt said:

Stunned that the surrounding cars didn't move an inch. The lady did well to get away. Glad they were just armed with axes, must have been terrifying for the occupants. I'd certainly have nudged the hoodlums away from that car. Running OVER them, they would have had to have guns.

As Mr Liga above just said...

[Oilchange]

I think thats a bit of an assumption. To justify using the most extreme force, one has to prove that it was the last resort, if the person was about to have their head stoved in by an axe, arguably you could use extreme or lethal force to protect that persons life. ‘I honestly believed the person would have been killed had I not run the attacker over’ etc...

exgtt said:

Stunned that the surrounding cars didn't move an inch. The lady did well to get away. Glad they were just armed with axes, must have been terrifying for the occupants. I'd certainly have nudged the hoodlums away from that car. Running OVER them, they would have had to have guns.

As Mr Liga above just said...

Edited by Oilchange on Saturday 25th November 22:56

[Halb]

ReverendCounter said:

There's always the concern that acid could be used to disable the driver once a hole was made. Given that distinct possibility, I'd be very interested to hear what a jury would make of someone moving attackers away with their car.

This would certainly be flowing through my head, and could cause me to panic quite severely.

[Mojooo]

Reality is that if you are dashcam driver it is not worth ramming them

1) if you did it is unlikely your insurance would cover you for your own car, the Bentley and any injury to the suspects

2) I suspect it was very much unnecessary and over the top to potentially disabled the suspects when the Police can catch up with them later and justice served that way

Be different if the persons life was in obvious danger.

I do think it would be justifiable for the Bentley driver to reverse and nudge them over though!

Edited by Mojooo on Sunday 26th November 04:22

[Smiler.]

bigandclever said:

..........I was 18 and stupid........

Yeah, not big & not clev........

........erm.........

[David87]

Mojooo said:

Reality is that if you are dashcam driver it is not worth ramming them

1) if you did it is unlikely your insurance would cover you for your own car, the Bentley and any injury to the suspects

2) I suspect it was very much unnecessary and over the top to potentially disabled the suspects when the Police can catch up with them later and justice served that way

Be different if the persons life was in obvious danger.

I do think it would be justifiable for the Bentley driver to reverse and nudge them over though!

Edited by Mojooo on Sunday 26th November 04:22

I’d worry about point 1 afterwards.

As for point 2, do you really think the police are going to catch these promising young footballers in a hurry? I very much doubt this is the first time they’ve done this - it just so happens this time it was a very flash car and was caught on camera, so the media is interested. In reality, driving into them will likely take them off the streets for longer than being caught by the police and prosecuted, even. And is infinitely more satisfying.