NationStates Jolt Archive


Murder or miscarriage (of justice)?

New British Glory
21-03-2005, 23:15
Lee Clegg was on check point duty one night in Belfast. A car approached his checkpoint and was told to stop. Instead it sped on and Clegg opened fire. He fired 3 shots as the car approached (shattering the windscreen) and he fired a final shot as the car sped away. The final shot killed Karen Reilly, a teenager, who had been sitting in the back. The car had in fact belong to a group of teenagers.

Clegg was charged with murder for which he pleaded self defence. His defence was dismissed and he was convicted because it was held by the trial judge that the final bullet (the one that killed Reilly) had been fired once the car had sped away from Clegg - as such he was no longer in danger and so could not have been acting in self defence. His conviction was upheld on appeal

I was doing some work and noticed this interesting legal titbit. I was quite shocked by it personally as rather harsh. After all Clegg had no idea as to whether the car held IRA terrorists or innocent joy riding teenagers.

What is your opinion on this matter? I would be interested to know.
I_Hate_Cows
21-03-2005, 23:18
Wouldn't shooting out the whells work too? why must everyone fire into the cab?

"I didn't mean to kill anyone..yes I only shot into the cab, where else would I shoot?"
Tograna
21-03-2005, 23:25
sorry but thats hollywood logic, in real life police only ever shoot to kill, none of this shoot them in the arm rubbish. Same goes for the army and cars, if hes shot a tyre the car could have gone off the road killing all of them and anyone in a car they might of hit or maybe passers by
Ashmoria
21-03-2005, 23:32
i certainly wouldnt have convicted him. he was justified in assuming that the car was dangerous to him. seems reasonable for him to assume he was defending his own life.
Smilleyville
21-03-2005, 23:33
True. Also, try to aim at the tyres if a car is speeding in your direction. You don't have the time to think. The teenagers should've stopped and none of this would have happened. The guardman must have had the authority to stop the vehicle by any means possible/needed if suspicion arose. He couldn't know what kind of people were in the car. If it was a known IRA-terrorist, he may have gotten a medal. Misfortune for both of them.
Illich Jackal
21-03-2005, 23:42
True. Also, try to aim at the tyres if a car is speeding in your direction. You don't have the time to think. The teenagers should've stopped and none of this would have happened. The guardman must have had the authority to stop the vehicle by any means possible/needed if suspicion arose. He couldn't know what kind of people were in the car. If it was a known IRA-terrorist, he may have gotten a medal. Misfortune for both of them.

Note that he killed her while the car was moving away from him. Even in the case it was a known IRA member he would have commited murder as the police/army does not have the power to shoot suspects ...
I_Hate_Cows
21-03-2005, 23:43
sorry but thats hollywood logic, in real life police only ever shoot to kill, none of this shoot them in the arm rubbish. Same goes for the army and cars, if hes shot a tyre the car could have gone off the road killing all of them and anyone in a car they might of hit or maybe passers by
Well if it killed all of them becauyse he shot the wheel, claim act of God. Its not like he killed them DIRECTLY that way
Renshahi
22-03-2005, 00:12
I am currently military and I work security as a secondary billet. Now I dont know if Ireland has the same rules but in most places this is pretty universal.
There is an exact list of times when you can use deadly force in a situation. I wont get into all of them, but the ones that Most Likely are in issue are these.

1. Protection of Self or others-the court decided since the last shot was fired after the vehicle drove by this was invalid reasoning
2. Public Health or saftey
3. Prevent access to Dangerous items ( Grenades, Rocket launchers, Ect)



Now we need to know exactly what he was guarding and the local area conditions to get a whole idea, but given the data presented, I say this was Darwinism at its best. If you didnt want to get shot, dont try to run over the guy with a gun!
These teens should be in jail for reckless endagerment and this cop should be in his bed at home right now.
Nadkor
22-03-2005, 00:15
personally, when im driving through Belfast i always make sure to stop at checkpoints...just seems like the most intelligent thing to do when theres a police guy with a big gun standing there
Bitchkitten
22-03-2005, 00:38
I'm afraid I don't have enough information to form a firm opinion on this one. Murder as a charge seems a little excessive, yet I think he could have acted more responsibly.
Alien Born
22-03-2005, 00:42
Why the fourth shot? The car had passed the checkpoint, it was no longer a threat to Clegg and his colleagues, but Clegg shot anyway. Murder, or maybe manslaughter, but definately culpable. The teenage kids joyriding in a stolen car through a military checkpoint in a terrorist area definately deserve Darwin awards however.
Two stupid actions do not necessarily cancel out, and in this case they did not.
Niini
22-03-2005, 00:45
Lee Clegg was on check point duty one night in Belfast. A car approached his checkpoint and was told to stop. Instead it sped on and Clegg opened fire. He fired 3 shots as the car approached (shattering the windscreen) and he fired a final shot as the car sped away. The final shot killed Karen Reilly, a teenager, who had been sitting in the back. The car had in fact belong to a group of teenagers.

Clegg was charged with murder for which he pleaded self defence. His defence was dismissed and he was convicted because it was held by the trial judge that the final bullet (the one that killed Reilly) had been fired once the car had sped away from Clegg - as such he was no longer in danger and so could not have been acting in self defence. His conviction was upheld on appeal

I was doing some work and noticed this interesting legal titbit. I was quite shocked by it personally as rather harsh. After all Clegg had no idea as to whether the car held IRA terrorists or innocent joy riding teenagers.

What is your opinion on this matter? I would be interested to know.

firstly! Very very stupid action from the kids... I really don't know the current state of Belfast, but sounds stupid to drive thru checkpoint if you are asked to stop...
But two things bothered me... He shot when the car was going away.
That isn't self defence. And he didn't know heter the car was full of IRA or
Teens... If nothing else this should be a warning to all who are planning to
take a ride in Belfast...
Nadkor
22-03-2005, 00:48
firstly! Very very stupid action from the kids... I really don't know the current state of Belfast, but sounds stupid to drive thru checkpoint if you are asked to stop...
But two things bothered me... He shot when the car was going away.
That isn't self defence. And he didn't know heter the car was full of IRA or
Teens... If nothing else this should be a warning to all who are planning to
take a ride in Belfast...
oh this happened years ago, when it was much more dangerous

i suppose he can always claim that if it was IRA then it was possible that they could have fired back at him as they sped away...
The Cat-Tribe
22-03-2005, 00:57
OK, I'm looking into more facts on this, but a few things:

This happened in 1990 - it is old news.

Mr. Clegg was cleared of all charges by the appellate court in 2000.

The case is currently in the news because Clegg now faces court martial for an entirely separate incident in which it is alleged he assault a juvenile.

Clegg facing court martial over assault (3/5/05) (http://212.2.162.45/news/story.asp?j=135691788&p=y3569z494&n=135692548)
Paratrooper Lee Clegg cleared of last charge over death of teenagers (2/1/00) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,,190513,00.html)
Grudging verdict after judge says defence a farrago of deceit and lies (3/12/99) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,315774,00.html)