From the tone of the story, it sounds there may be more to it than we know. Perhaps the guy's a bit trigger-happy. What's with all this "lookout" stuff anyway. Was he lying in wait? Anyway, it's clear we haven't seen all the facts.
A note on the law. Not everyplace has the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. In the US for example, you may only use *deadly* force to counter *deadly* force. You shoot a guy coming at you with his fists, and you have no "self-defense" defense -- it's murder. Unless you're a 90lb. woman vs. a 220+lb. man, in which case, maybe you fairly felt the force levelled at you by his fists was in fact "deadly." Also, in many states, even when faced with deadly force, you must still retreat first if possible, otherwise once again you are barred from the defense of self-defense.
That said, most states in the US have a big exception to this rule for when you are "in the home." That's why you can ignore these rules and shoot an intruder. But, that needn't be the law everywhere. We would have to see England's particular legal setup to know what obligations the farmer was under. I can very easily imagine a setup where he had a duty to retreat first.
Finally, the "in the home" exception in the US is based on a safety issue. AFAIK, It is never the case in the US that deadly force can be used *solely* to protect property. No matter who the person is, the law considers them worth more than your chattel property. You shoot the guy running across your yard with your laptop in-hand, you are a murderer, plain and simple.
Again, all rules have local exceptions. In Texas and Louisiana (as of 4 years ago), you can use deadly force to combat "Mischeif in the Dark of Night." While this rule will technically allow you to shoot someone keying your car in your driveway after dark (gotta love those Texans
), it's real PURPOSE is, again, a SAFETY, not a PROPERTY concern that is the base for this rule.
SO WE NEED MORE FACTS!!!
[ 06-05-2003, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]