Crocodile Dundee or William Tell? A thief broke into a Sydney home on the weekend, stole money, goods, and car keys. As he tried to steal the SUV the 68 year-old resident appeared, armed with bow and arrow. As the thief tried to escape the resident shot him in the butt. If he is found he will be charged with B&E but the resident will be charged with assault with a deadly. What's your opinion? Should he be charged? Should he have aimed a little higher? Or lower?
In my opinion, the homeowner should be given a medal for defending his home and property. I hope the thief gets an infection and his butt swells to the size of Kim Kardashians butt.
I agree with Corey, the thief got what he deserved. A person should never be charged when he is defending what is his. Hope the arrow head was barbed and rusty.(might have been better if he had shot the thief in the knee.... Give him some aches and pains to remind him not to do it again)
Well, the rule of law (as opposed to the law of the case) generally is that property is not as important as human life; so I am not surprised at the initial position of the police.
But we do not have all the information.
If the man could duplicate that shot, thus demonstrating that he was proficient with bow and arrow and therefore not acting recklessly when he shot, that could be a factor.
Also I am unfamiliar with the court system in Australia and how "indictments" are obtained. If the system is similar to the USA, he may not be indicted.
And if I were on that jury, the prosecutor had best expect a lesson in jury nullification.