Chris Grayling says householders should be protected by the law unless they react with "grossly disproportionate" force. The law on self-defence has only recently been clarified, in fact, and it's worth noting how friendly it already is to the victim of a burglary. It's long been clear that you are entitled to use reasonable force in defence of people or property. But section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 spells out that whether the force you use is reasonable depends on the circumstances as you believed them to be – even if your belief was unreasonable. The jury must take into account that you cannot be expected to "weigh to a nicety" what you should do to defend yourself – and in effect, you get the benefit of the doubt if you only did what you honestly and instinctively thought necessary. What the law does not permit is disproportionate force; Grayling's proposal is that the ceiling on what a victim is entitled to do should be raised. But his response, making disproportionate force legitimate across the board, is itself disproportionate.
Read my full piece on Chris Grayling and his proposals following the Munir Hussain case, at Comment is Free.
Have your say - join the discussion