Chef stabs assailant and now faces prison.

[Delerium]

What would of happend if the little shits had kept having a go at him, he did not pull his knife, and they found him, how do you think it would of turned out then? they were looking for a fight and when they did they did everything they could to give some guy a hiding by stacking the odds in their favour, and now that the tables got turned on them we are meant to punish the guy?!?!?


We dont know WHY he pleaded guilty, perhaps because he did not think he would win the court case and wanted a potentially lighter sentence by pleading so?

[Patrick]

Some good points made with this post.


Skyryder

And some not so good...

Being on a bus with plenty of witnesses didn't stop the shitkickers... Witnesses? What did any do when they were throwing things at the chef? What did they do when he was punched? Would they be witnesses? May not want to be involved... "I didn't see anything" perhaps?

Cops a smack in the mouth and not do something about it? I sure as hell would react, I'm nobodys punchbag.. but not to this guys extent obviously.

Some good points made, perhaps, but also claims to carry a knife himself and "claims" he would have the control not to use it? Hmmmmmm.... Tui???

[Patrick]

What would of happend if the little shits had kept having a go at him, he did not pull his knife, and they found him, how do you think it would of turned out then? they were looking for a fight and when they did they did everything they could to give some guy a hiding by stacking the odds in their favour, and now that the tables got turned on them we are meant to punish the guy?!?!?


We dont know WHY he pleaded guilty, perhaps because he did not think he would win the court case and wanted a potentially lighter sentence by pleading so?

Would rather he pleaded not guilty, so the little shites would have to give evidence, and while they are in the box, ask some real pressing questions about what occurred... the gangsta crap, the things thrown, the punch, the numbers... discredit the little feckers and walk away free as a free thing...

[jrandom]

Some good points made, perhaps, but also claims to carry a knife himself and "claims" he would have the control not to use it? Hmmmmmm.... Tui???

Not to use it inappropriately, dude. Key difference.

If I had a problem with anger or lack of control, I wouldn't dare. But I don't.

It's easy enough to run a blade around or down someone's arm when they're having a go at you. No reason to stab them in the torso if you're not trying to kill them. Do you think that the same charges would have been laid if Mr Chef had kept his cool and gangsta boy had turned up at the A&E with a severed bicep?

Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.

[u4ea]

Preventing further attack.

NOt so sure... unarmed groups can kill a lone victim....

I had a freind years ago who was a loving father and not a violent man who helped out a guy who was being attacked by local thugs.His head was kicked soo hard he was DOA...These teenagers are not innocent .They roam the streets and places just to antagonise anyone .Standover tactics the lot.Then they grow up and become bigger thugs.I have always carried personal protection for that very reason.Namby pamby pc bullshit says the baby thugs are just misundertood. Watever!!!

[Goblin]

Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.

Except Mr Chef wasnt carrying a lethal weapon...it was a tool of his trade. It was self defence. The little shit got what he deserved! Good luck to Mr Chef, I hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist...but know our "justice" system, he will be made an example of. How dare a young man with a job and goals in life defend himself against a group of wannabe gangsters.

[mdooher]

Anger, lack of control, inappropriate response.... PC bullshit. Humans have these responses for a reason ... they keeps us alive.

If you are approached by a gang of teenage scum and try to ignore them, walk away or wait until one of them hits you before you do something, it is only going to end badly for you.

As soon as you think there is going to be trouble attack the one you can get to. It MUST result in a debilitating injury (break an arm, poke out an eye, kill one of them whatever) then go after the next one. Oh they will run alright.

Remember, just like the police you have the right to win and you must win. Use whatever force you deem appropriate ...and a gang of kids is a serious DEADLY threat. Don't ever think they are JUST kids. They will behave just like a pack of dogs. Show any weakness and at the very least you will end up being kicked in the head.

I say teach the little fuckers what the real world is like.

[Patrick]

Not to use it inappropriately, dude. Key difference. If I had a problem with anger or lack of control, I wouldn't dare. But I don't.

Thats probably just what Mr Chef boy thought too... until he found himself in a "situation..."

Too thick to defend the charge, or his lawyer is useless... or both......

[jrandom]

Thats probably just what Mr Chef boy thought too... until he found himself in a "situation..."

He was weighed in the balance, and found wanting.

I hope to fare better when my time comes.

Too thick to defend the charge, or his lawyer is useless... or both......

... or he and his lawyer realise that his actions went beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defence, and that a defence in Court would have been very unlikely to succeed, making a guilty plea to the reduced charge appropriate.

[Patrick]

He was weighed in the balance, and found wanting.

I hope to fare better when my time comes.

Like he thought too, perhaps???

... or he and his lawyer realise that his actions went beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defence, and that a defence in Court would have been very unlikely to succeed, making a guilty plea to the reduced charge appropriate.

I have had burglars caught red handed with the literal sack over the shoulder, still in the house they broke into, and lawyers running a not guilty plea the whole way....

Why not in Mr Chefs case??????? He definitely has a case worth defending. I reckon I could have won this one for him easy....

[jrandom]

Are you some sort of fucking retard?

I wonder, sometimes.

He wasn't carrying a weapon, he was carrying his work tools...

Hence the lack of charges relating to carrying an offensive weapon, I suspect.

little pieces of shit... not cutting each of them ear to ear, and then cutting the cocks off of their fathers...

You present as an angry, impotent man who will never make a difference to anything he rants about.

[Skyryder]

Except Mr Chef wasnt carrying a lethal weapon...it was a tool of his trade. It was self defence. The little shit got what he deserved! Good luck to Mr Chef, I hope he gets off with a slap on the wrist...but know our "justice" system, he will be made an example of. How dare a young man with a job and goals in life defend himself against a group of wannabe gangsters.

Absolutey Goblin. These shits saw some easy meat and one of them came off second best. If they had all just minded their own buisness instead of all this 'colour' thing no one would have got hurt. But that's just too difficult for these retards.

Skyryder

[Mr Merde]

......
Anyone who carries a weapon, particularly an immediately lethal one, has a responsibility to train with it and exercise restraint in its use. Failing in that regard was Mr Chef's main fuckup.

Anyone who has been trained to carry a weapon will know that, if and when it is brought into use, it is used to its fullest capabilities.

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

When faced with a potential life threatening situation a trained person will go for a shot or a thrust that immediately nulifies that threat. In most cases that will be a fatal decision.

Not picking on you here jrandom but TV and the movies have a lot to answer for with respect to peoples perceptions of how these situations should be answered.

In my particular case I was trained to carry a pistol and that training involved learning to use it in these situations. In every scenario it was stressed that we fired two shots to the central mass and then one to the head of our antagonist.

BTT

[Delerium]

Anyone who has been trained to carry a weapon will know that, if and when it is brought into use, it is used to its fullest capabilities.

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

When faced with a potential life threatening situation a trained person will go for a shot or a thrust that immediately nulifies that threat. In most cases that will be a fatal decision.

Not picking on you here jrandom but TV and the movies have a lot to answer for with respect to peoples perceptions of how these situations should be answered.

In my particular case I was trained to carry a pistol and that training involved learning to use it in these situations. In every scenario it was stressed that we fired two shots to the central mass and then one to the head of our antagonist.

BTT

x2. Just like asking your average policeman to shoot somebody in the leg or arm during an armed standoff. HA! Fat chance. Pumped up with adrenalin, hands shaking, trying to protect your own ass and possibly somebody elses. Nobody wants to put in this sort of situation, and nobody should, but if you are, use it or lose it.

[jrandom]

All this crap about wounding or incapacitating someone with a careful thrust of a blade or an aimed shot at a bodily extremity is just that, crap.

Hmm, I went back and read what I wrote, and figured someone would bring that point up.

You're quite right, of course. I shouldn't be supporting my argument with movie-plot scenarios.

I think it boils down to one of two things being the case. Either:

(a) Mr Chef shouldn't have drawn; or

(b) Mr Chef should be defending the charge.

And I guess we'll never really know which of the above is true.