Legal Mumbo Jumbo - Update

On December 14th i wrote of the English case of Munir Hussain who, along with his brother, chased down and beat a home invader with a cricket bat leaving the criminal brain damaged.  He and his brother were convicted and sentenced to jail terms.

The Lord Chief Justice has suspended the sentence of Mr Hussain and reduced the sentence of his brother.  He noted that he rarely sees defendants in such cases of the high standing that these two men had.  He ruled that mercy was justified.

It is just that Mr Hussain should not serve time in jail.  He and his family had been through a terrifying ordeal in which they were tied up and their lives threatened.  It is offensive that Mr Hussain is deemed worthy of 'mercy' for it should never have even been at issue.

The subjective concept of what is "reasonable" is littered throughout Common Law yet is never adequately defined.  What would a "reasonable" person do after being tied up along with his wife and children and having their lives threatened?  Is it "reasonable" to expect him to assess what is "reasonable" under the law in the minutes after the sanctity of his home was violated and the lives of his family threatened?

There is a proposal to change the legal standard so that people like Mr Hussain are only charged if their actions are "grossly disproportionate."  This is a sensible move since the judicial system seems to have a warped view of that which is reasonable and will engage in prosecutions that bring the administration of justice into disrepute.