Proceeding contribution from Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 2 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill.
Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill
I fully support my hon. Friend’s attempt to change the law on the use of reasonable force against people who are found in others’ homes. Given the inadequacy of the law and the prevalence of burglary that she describes, may I draw her attention to the case of one of my constituents? He woke one early morning to find two people in his house and chased them off. When the case went to court, those people offered the defence that they had been in the house looking for their cat. Incredibly, the case fell because of lack of evidence that they had the intent to steal. Is it not absurd that they were able to offer that defence? Should not the law be changed further so that there is a presumption that if people enter premises with no reasonable excuse, they commit a crime?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c501-2
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crimes against the person Crimes of violence Criminal law Buildings Burglary Criminal liability Firearms Protection Police Prosecutions Property Victims Trespass Self-defence
- Legislation
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:10:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282948
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282948
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282948