The police take street robbery pretty seriously but not if you don’t tell them about it until you’ve lost and eye and killed someone.

This seems like a pretty shitty outcome all round, oh and a man is dead which seems a bit over the top for nicking a phone.

Conviction right but dead bloke chose to live a life where chance of death was increased so little sympathy for him. If more people were concerned about the potential for the victim to get his own back then perhaps there’d be less violence – kinda like the nuclear threat?!

From the judge’s statement

At the High Court in Livingston judge Lord Boyd noted that Bradley “was a man of violence” and had “10 convictions for assault” prior to his death.

“Had he been caught it seems likely given his record that he would have been prosecuted in this court, the High Court, and on conviction would have received a High Court sentence.

Speaks volumes about the justice system. Given the guy had 10 convictions for assault I actually find it highly unlikely that the high court would have given out any punishment that would have been appropriate.

Vigilante violence isn’t the answer, but when someone with that level of violent history is still roaming the streets, it’s no wonder people are driven to take matters into their own hands.

And I’m no parent, but I was mugged when I was about 12 and had my bike taken off me by a boy who was probably about ten years older than me. Got home and told my parents, and my dad jumped in the car with me and spent the next few hours driving the streets looking for the guy. Thankfully my old man didn’t have a knife, but I reckon if he’d found the guy he would have killed him. And for the record my dad is a quiet, respectable man but I can completely understand how someone would protect their children and seek retribution. It’s just sad that these things often spiral out of control.

The courts take a dim view of vigilantism. Probably rightly so, considering the alternative.

Was it a 5C or 5S?

Well I suppose it’s a classic case of an eye for an i justice 😀

You don’t want idiots/thugs like the father roaming free any more than the mugger.

He grabbed a knife and tracked the guy down using the find my iphone feature. What would have happened if the mugger had just sold the phone to someone in the pub?

Let’s guess shall we…the father would have threatened them with his knife and taken the iphone from him 🙂

Oh the irony.

To be fair, it is Greenock. I don’t think anyone leaves the house without a knife.

but when someone with that level of violent history is still roaming the streets, it’s no wonder people are driven to take matters into their own hands.

the father didn’t know that tho, his son was robbed by a stranger and he went out to do something about it, whether he actually meant to harm the mugger is the question but going out in numbers and carrying a knife doesn’t help with your defence.

He pleaded guilty, that was his biggest mistake!

The judge said “It’s clear you were prepared to be met with violence – or at least the threat of violence – and went armed to meet it.”

sounds like self defence to me!

He grabbed a knife and tracked the guy down using the find my iphone feature. What would have happened if the mugger had just sold the phone to someone in the pub?

Or you could argue that he went out immediately to avoid that situation.

the father didn’t know that tho, his son was robbed by a stranger and he went out to do something about it, whether he actually meant to harm the mugger is the question but going out in numbers and carrying a knife doesn’t help with your defence.

But he did know the guy was armed with a knife, had threatened his son, and possibly took the son in question to identify the mugger.

He pleaded guilty, that was his biggest mistake!

Might just be me but I think that stabbing someone might have been a slightly bigger mistake.

The judge said “It’s clear you were prepared to be met with violence – or at least the threat of violence – and went armed to meet it.”

sounds like self defence to me!

You have a rather odd definition of self defence.

The judge said “It’s clear you were prepared to be met with violence – or at least the threat of violence – and went armed to meet it.”

sounds like self defence to me!

Funnily enough, it would be the dead guy who would have been more able to rely on self defence.

To take his 16 and 17yo sons with him on a knife armed vigilante mission is abhorrent! Sounds like a thug leading his thug kids down the same path… It’s a sad world…

Self defence? armed before he went and with a grouped against one guy, nope that’s intent. Judge did well, Ok maybe the Police may not have taken action but that doesn’t mean you can kill a guy.

Can’t say I have any sympathy with either of them. But killing someone because they stole your sons phone surely isn’t acceptable.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the thief was known to the dad and he thought he’d go and sort him out.

Greenock’s a shite hole, full of neds.

Might just be me but I think that stabbing someone five times might have been a slightly bigger mistake.

is it more justified once hes stabbed you in the eye though?

But killing someone because they stole your sons phone surely isn’t acceptable.

Are you reading a different story? It seems he killed the bloke because he got stabbed in the eye.

But killing someone because they stole your sons phone surely isn’t acceptable.

Going after him was probably more to do with his son having a knife pulled out on him to obtain the phone rather than the phone being stolen.

is it more justified once hes stabbed you in the eye though?

Killing him by stabbing him repeatedly, no.

Nice folk don’t go out armed with a knife to get a stolen phone back.

He left the house carrying a knife, his reason for carrying a knife was that his sons phone was stolen (at knife point). Would he have gone after the guy had the sons phone not been taken, I doubt it.

If more people were concerned about the potential for the victim to get his own back then perhaps there’d be less violence – kinda like the nuclear threat?!

What you mean like those states in America where you are allowed to carry a gun for protection? I’m pretty sure those states aren’t some sort of crime free utopia, because all the criminals are to scared to break the law.

In defence of Police Scotland; they had already successfully prosecuted Bradley at least 10 times already. I would imagine that advised of a knife point robbery they would have done everything possible to prosecute him again.

Meh. Two knife wielding mutters off the street. Could be worse.

I would imagine that advised of a knife point robbery they would have done everything possible to prosecute him again.

Yeah but seems he’d have been back doing the same thing again soon enough.

But yeah informing the police would have been the correct approach.

jon1973 – Member
If more people were concerned about the potential for the victim to get his own back then perhaps there’d be less violence – kinda like the nuclear threat?!
What you mean like those states in America where you are allowed to carry a gun for protection? I’m pretty sure those states aren’t some sort of crime free utopia, because all the criminals are to scared to break the law.

POSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST
I happen to live in one of those states and my wife and I carry most days. Strange thing is, we do still have crime, and you rarely ever hear of people using their protection weapons. We certainly don’t hear about vigilante justice, so maybe “Muricans” aren’t ALL as trigger-happy as everyone thinks.

The stats would suggest otherwise, skids

I happen to live in one of those states and my wife and I carry most days. Strange thing is, we do still have crime, and you rarely ever hear of people using their protection weapons. We certainly don’t hear about vigilante justice, so maybe “Muricans” aren’t ALL as trigger-happy as everyone thinks.

I find this absolutely hilarious and terrifying in equal measures.

Personally I would have done the same and the 3 years inside would have been well worth it

Caution internet hardman alert!!

boardinbob +1. shitehole of a place, only bonus is two nutters off of the street.

All this trouble over an eye phone

Why are some of you happy to take the piss out of the yanks arming themselves to the teeth for “self-defense” but then defend this man.

Should we all be allowed to carry knives for defense in public?

What you mean like those states in America where you are allowed to carry a gun for protection? I’m pretty sure those states aren’t some sort of crime free utopia, because all the criminals are to scared to break the law.

For the sake of the truth however, the concealed carry states do have lower rates of violent crime including rape or have at least seen drops in levels of crime since concealed carry was introduced.

practically everywhere in the US has seen a drop in crime – it’s been on a downward trend for thirty years. there’s no magic bullet (bdum tish) to crime – no single factor that will determine everything.

An eye for an i. I’m here all week

Sadly you’re not even original
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/man-kills-son-mugger-after-confrontation/page/2#post-6278869

Eye couldn’t be bothered to read page 2. ..that’ll learn me.

Like my mum always said when I was messing around ” it’s always funny until someone loses an eye”

Realised that my mum might have been the only mum to have said that so the target audience is very small.