Law, Negligence, Cars and Crooks...(split)

[Keevan_Colton]

Interesting form of protest, but I fail to see why this is being allowed - it's a peaceful protest but on someone's private property, that does count as trespass and I'm fairly sure that if he or the rest of his family wanted to, they could have them removed and arrested for it.

Here's a fun fact, signs that say "Trespassers will be prosecuted" are lies. Trespass is a civil matter here, not a criminal one...the worst you can do is attempt to sue 'em.

[El Moose Monstero]

Interesting form of protest, but I fail to see why this is being allowed - it's a peaceful protest but on someone's private property, that does count as trespass and I'm fairly sure that if he or the rest of his family wanted to, they could have them removed and arrested for it.

Here's a fun fact, signs that say "Trespassers will be prosecuted" are lies. Trespass is a civil matter here, not a criminal one...the worst you can do is attempt to sue 'em.

Really? You learn something new every day. I wonder if the changes they're attempting to make require any form of planning permission?

[Keevan_Colton]

Really? You learn something new every day. I wonder if the changes they're attempting to make require any form of planning permission?

I'm not sure if some of the land law reforms change that substantially, but I do know the police cannot arrest or move you simply for trespass, only the onwer of the property or his designated agents can do so.

[Fire Fly]

So, does that mean that in Britain, if a burgler attempted to rob you but didn't actually steal anything, they technically cannot be prosecuted then?

[The Third Man]

Yes, the signs should say "we will try our damnest to prosecute trespassers" - even under civil law, trespass in itself is not really prosecutable, unless there is damage, nuisance, criminal intent etc taking place (or under recent legislation, if you are Madonna). There was once IIRC a case in which "damage to grass" was claimed.

So GP had better be careful they don't knock any roof tiles off or do a substandard job - that would be criminal damage. Which, when you think about it, makes the whole thing an even better deal for Two-Jabs - not only does he get free stuff, but the job must be done right.

They can come and do the same for me anytime, and while they're up there, how about fixing a couple of loose tiles.

Planning permission / building regs / insurance / H&S is an interesting legal aspect; but a lot of the latter two goes out the window if no invoice changes hands (or it's classed as a DIY job)

[Keevan_Colton]

So, does that mean that in Britain, if a burgler attempted to rob you but didn't actually steal anything, they technically cannot be prosecuted then?

There's a reason that the crime is called "Breaking and entering" here...you've got to have used some kind of force to gain entry...so if you left your doors unlocked and someone wandered in, then no you couldnt prosecute them.

[The Third Man]

So, does that mean that in Britain, if a burgler attempted to rob you but didn't actually steal anything, they technically cannot be prosecuted then?

No. There's various other stuff. If they force entry, it's "breaking and entering", then there's "attempted" burglary etc.

The principle is, I guess, if someone just happens to innocently wander into your property and leaves if you ask them to, then they haven't done anything wrong.

[Xon]

Here's a fun fact, signs that say "Trespassers will be prosecuted" are lies. Trespass is a civil matter here, not a criminal one...the worst you can do is attempt to sue 'em.

As a trespasser, you generally can get successfully sued for anything from damaging the grass to any form of damages they owner can think of.

I bet Emotional distress can also be covered too.

Modifications to someones house without permision is probably illegal, and in Australia you could probably force them to pay to have the modifications reversed at their own cost.

[Rogue 9]

Interesting form of protest, but I fail to see why this is being allowed - it's a peaceful protest but on someone's private property, that does count as trespass and I'm fairly sure that if he or the rest of his family wanted to, they could have them removed and arrested for it.

Here's a fun fact, signs that say "Trespassers will be prosecuted" are lies. Trespass is a civil matter here, not a criminal one...the worst you can do is attempt to sue 'em.

That's why we have signs like this in the States:

[Montcalm]

Is there one that say survivor will be assraped?

[Alyrium Denryle]

That's why we have signs like this in the States:

The wonderful thing is that in most states we can legally make good on that sign.

[Dahak]

So, does that mean that in Britain, if a burgler attempted to rob you but didn't actually steal anything, they technically cannot be prosecuted then?

There's a reason that the crime is called "Breaking and entering" here...you've got to have used some kind of force to gain entry...so if you left your doors unlocked and someone wandered in, then no you couldnt prosecute them.

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

[Alyrium Denryle]

what is wrong weith European legal systems?

[Rogue 9]

So, does that mean that in Britain, if a burgler attempted to rob you but didn't actually steal anything, they technically cannot be prosecuted then?

There's a reason that the crime is called "Breaking and entering" here...you've got to have used some kind of force to gain entry...so if you left your doors unlocked and someone wandered in, then no you couldnt prosecute them.

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

German law is fucked up. For evidence of this thesis, see above post.

[Alyrium Denryle]

There's a reason that the crime is called "Breaking and entering" here...you've got to have used some kind of force to gain entry...so if you left your doors unlocked and someone wandered in, then no you couldnt prosecute them.

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

German law is fucked up. For evidence of this thesis, see above post.

You actually need permits in germany to alter your own property. CUt down a tree you dont like, dig garden ponds etc

[Dahak]

There's a reason that the crime is called "Breaking and entering" here...you've got to have used some kind of force to gain entry...so if you left your doors unlocked and someone wandered in, then no you couldnt prosecute them.

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

German law is fucked up. For evidence of this thesis, see above post.

Why?
Not locking your door is negligence, and you make it easy for a thief to enter.
Not locking your car is equally stupid, and makes it easy for a thief to rob it, thus abetting a criminal offense.

[Rogue 9]

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

German law is fucked up. For evidence of this thesis, see above post.

Why?
Not locking your door is negligence, and you make it easy for a thief to enter.
Not locking your car is equally stupid, and makes it easy for a thief to rob it, thus abetting a criminal offense.

Three words. Blame. The. Victim.

[Alyrium Denryle]

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

German law is fucked up. For evidence of this thesis, see above post.

Why?
Not locking your door is negligence, and you make it easy for a thief to enter.
Not locking your car is equally stupid, and makes it easy for a thief to rob it, thus abetting a criminal offense.

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

[Darth Wong]

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

You are assuming that there are no other victims. Suppose some drunken idiot gets into a car with the keys left in the ignition and the door unlocked, and proceeds to kill someone while he's driving? Yes, of course, he's the primary guilty party. But could you not say that the owner of the car was negligent?

[Glocksman]

If you leave your front door unlocked around here and someone "breaks" in (which you have to do, as German front doors have normally no door handle to simply open them), no insurance will pay for it, and you might have a negligence case on your hand.
Leaving your car unlocked in public space, and a cop sees it, will get you a fine for abetting a thief

You are aware that rapists often use a variation of this as a defense, aren't you?

"Tha' bitch was askin' for it, dressin' up in heels an' a skirt that short."

To carry the 'logic' in German law to its extreme, the woman abetted in her own rape by wearing a short skirt instead of a nun's habit or a chastity belt.

[Rogue 9]

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

You are assuming that there are no other victims. Suppose some drunken idiot gets into a car with the keys left in the ignition and the door unlocked, and proceeds to kill someone while he's driving? Yes, of course, he's the primary guilty party. But could you not say that the owner of the car was negligent?

Dahak said you get ticketed on the charge of aiding and abetting a robbery for leaving a car unlocked, even if the car is not robbed. That meets the definition of "fucked up," I think.

[Alyrium Denryle]

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

You are assuming that there are no other victims. Suppose some drunken idiot gets into a car with the keys left in the ignition and the door unlocked, and proceeds to kill someone while he's driving? Yes, of course, he's the primary guilty party. But could you not say that the owner of the car was negligent?

There isn't a reasonable expectation that that would happen. In order for an act to be negligence it must be able for a reasonable person to conclude that as a result of not locking the car door, peopole would be killed or injured.

The responsibility is not on the shoulders of those who are robbed, but on he who willfully violates another person's property and uses it to kill someone.

It is like leaving a hammer on your porch, going inside for a drink of water, then someone comes by sees your hammer, and then uses it to murder his wife. The one who's hammer was stolen is not responsible because a reasonable eprson could not conclude that that would happen under anything resembling normal circumstances.

[Glocksman]

Done - Kev

[Dahak]

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

In respect to the car, what is fined is the possibility of a crime taking place when you leave a car unlocked.
By doing so, you make it possible (invite him really to just do it...) for a thief to commit a crime, thus you're abetting that criminal, and that is punishable.
The police is responsible to avert crimes whenever possible.
I don't see your problem...

[Rogue 9]

The crime is commited against the victim. To fine or jail them for being robbed is fucked up.

In respect to the car, what is fined is the possibility of a crime taking place when you leave a car unlocked.
By doing so, you make it possible (invite him really to just do it...) for a thief to commit a crime, thus you're abetting that criminal, and that is punishable.
The police is responsible to avert crimes whenever possible.
I don't see your problem...

You don't see the problem behind making actions not taken illegal? If the car is not stolen, then there was no crime, and therefore nothing to abet. Yet the owner gets punished for abetting a crime... that never occurred. You don't see a problem?