Toronto man faces assault charge for stabbing home intruder

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 2:33 AM GMT
    And yet there are those including Canadians like meninlove who don't believe that so called "castle" laws are required.

    http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/crime/article/1249846--toronto-man-faces-assault-charge-for-stabbing-home-intruder

    Stabbing an intruder: Is it self-defence or assault?

    Moses Mahilal and his girlfriend, Sarah Walsh, sensed trouble as they entered her mother’s house just after 3 a.m. on July 31, 2011, and found the side door ajar.

    They became even more alarmed when they saw a large pair of black, high-top Air Jordans at the bottom of the staircase leading to the second floor, where her mother, Kimberly Walsh, was asleep.

    Mahilal, 26, made a beeline for the kitchen, grabbed a large knife and ran upstairs, where he confronted the intruder hiding behind the door of Kimberly Walsh’s bedroom.

    Within minutes, the wounded intruder, Kino Johnson, 33, was gone, and hours later Mahilal, was under arrest and charged with aggravated assault. A preliminary hearing is set for Sept. 11.

    The case highlights the much-debated subject of how much force is too much when a stranger attempts to steal your property or break into your house.

    Johnson has already admitted he was unlawfully inside the upscale home near Keele St. and Eglinton Ave. W. On June 28, he pleaded guilty in Ontario Superior Court to break and enter and two counts of possessing stolen property, including jewelry taken after he broke into an unoccupied Finch Ave. W. highrise apartment.

    Johnson “gained access by unknown means” to the Walsh residence, and once inside, “one of the victims armed himself for safety,” Crown attorney David Fisher said, reading from an agreed statement of facts.

    A “struggle ensued,” and Johnson received a stab wound to his chest and lacerations to his hand and leg, Fisher said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 2:09 PM GMT
    You know nothing of the sort about us, lol.


    "The Canadian government recently passed legislation designed to expand the legal powers of a private citizen to make an arrest, and it applies in a situation like this, Brown said.

    The Citizen’s Arrest and Self Defence Act permits “the reasonable use of force, taking into account all the circumstances of the particular case,” says a backgrounder posted on the Department of Justice website. However, “a person is not entitled to use excessive force in a citizen’s arrest.”

    The new law was nicknamed the Lucky Moose bill, after the case of David Chen, the owner of the Lucky Moose food mart in Toronto’s Chinatown. He was charged with forcible confinement and assault after he and colleagues tied up a career thief and tossed him in a delivery van.

    Chen was acquitted and Mahilal will ask a jury of his peers for the same outcome, Brown said."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 2:49 PM GMT
    I am sure Riddler would rather everyone had the right to blow away anyone who enters their property without permission, just like in good ole Florida.

    Of course you should have the right to defend your home against intruders and to use reasonable force in doing so. Depending on the circumstances, 'reasonable' force can include anything up to and including lethal force. In the heat of the moment, the law does not require that you carefully assess the amount of force required. It simply says the force should not be excessive in the circumstances. What you should not have the right to do is carry out a summary execution in your own home, which is what the self-defence laws of Canada, the UK and much of the rest of the world make clear.

    In the UK, charges are rarely brought against those using force against unlawful intruders. When charges are brought and the case is not discontinued by the prosecutor, guess who decides if the force used was reasonable in the circumstance? Yes, a jury of twelve ordinary men and women. The gun laws of the wild west are not required.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 3:01 PM GMT

    Ex_Mil8 said, "What you should not have the right to do is carry out a summary execution in your own home, which is what the self-defence laws of Canada, the UK and much of the rest of the world make clear."

    This.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2012 8:10 PM GMT
    As if to prove the point, this happened in the UK today:

    "A couple who were arrested after a shotgun was fired at intruders during a break-in will not face charges, the Crown Prosecution Service has said.

    Judith Walker, Chief Crown Prosecutor for the East Midlands, said: "I am satisfied that this is a case where householders, faced with intruders in frightening circumstances, acted in reasonable self-defence."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-19496531
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2012 8:40 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI am sure Riddler would rather everyone had the right to blow away anyone who enters their property without permission, just like in good ole Florida.

    Of course you should have the right to defend your home against intruders and to use reasonable force in doing so. Depending on the circumstances, 'reasonable' force can include anything up to and including lethal force. In the heat of the moment, the law does not require that you carefully assess the amount of force required. It simply says the force should not be excessive in the circumstances. What you should not have the right to do is carry out a summary execution in your own home, which is what the self-defence laws of Canada, the UK and much of the rest of the world make clear.

    In the UK, charges are rarely brought against those using force against unlawful intruders. When charges are brought and the case is not discontinued by the prosecutor, guess who decides if the force used was reasonable in the circumstance? Yes, a jury of twelve ordinary men and women. The gun laws of the wild west are not required.


    Based on the details as presented, it makes no sense that charges were brought. The question of "excessiveness" should not be so grey - particularly when someone else sought to break into your home. Further, while it shouldn't be a license to summary execution to break into a home, if you break the law in such a way, you should also recognize that there are risks. It is however incidents like this that make it clear that there should be additional protections for those who choose to defend themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2012 8:50 PM GMT
    riddler78 said

    Based on the details as presented, it makes no sense that charges were brought. The question of "excessiveness" should not be so grey - particularly when someone else sought to break into your home. Further, while it shouldn't be a license to summary execution to break into a home, if you break the law in such a way, you should also recognize that there are risks. It is however incidents like this that make it clear that there should be additional protections for those who choose to defend themselves.


    Each case is investigated and decided on its merits. There is no requirement for a blanket law that presumes you are always in the right when you kill or seriously injure an intruder in your home. Otherwise, you end up with enabling laws for the trigger happy (aka 'stand your ground' and 'make my day').