83 year old aikido black belt repels home invader. [Archive]

Janet Rosen

10-27-2012, 04:01 PM

The home invader, a muscular man in his thirties who may be linked to other burglaries, broke into the high-set home in Gilruth Rd, Kenmore at about 8.30pm.
Inside were Edwin Dowdy, 83, and his wife Jutta, 76, who have lived in the property in the quiet Kenmore street since 1966.
When the couple - who both have black belts in the Japanese art of Aikido - realised there was an intruder in the house Mr Dowdy grabbed a knife from the lounge room he had kept for security and went to confront the burglar and warn him he was armed.
He said he confronted the intruder and told him he had a knife, but the man tried to push past him and ran on to the blade.
The injured burglar - who was bleeding heavily from a knife wound to his stomach - took two of Mrs Dowdy's handbags and ran on to the balcony and jumped to the ground.
A large amount of blood was visible there this morning.
He then fled down with the Dowdys in pursuit and tried to steal a car from a few doors down.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/news/home-invader-no-match-for-83-year-old-black-belt-in-kenmore-home-invasion/story-fncvfxcm-1226504363640#ixzz2AXUydoXk

Michael Hackett

10-27-2012, 04:40 PM

Their names are perfect too for a story like this!

Rob Watson

10-27-2012, 05:48 PM

Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

Millsy

10-27-2012, 11:10 PM

Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

It's when they run into it several time it becomes annoying!

Lyle Laizure

10-28-2012, 03:48 AM

The detective stated, at least twice in that article, that only "reasonable" force is allowed and that they don't know that transpired in the house. In addition to that their "concern" for the burglar has definate overtones of wanting his/her side of the story to possibly arrest the homeowners.

Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault. The fact that the article mentions that both of the individuals have attained a blackbelt in Aikido and that the fella's own account of what happened really does set them up for serious liability.

Lyle Laizure

10-28-2012, 03:54 AM

Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

Shadowfax

10-28-2012, 06:11 AM

Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault. The fact that the article mentions that both of the individuals have attained a blackbelt in Aikido and that the fella's own account of what happened really does set them up for serious liability.

The news article is Australian but I expect they have similar laws there.

This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who did not find this amusing. Information is missing but the whole story sure does not make the aikidoka look good.

philipsmith

10-28-2012, 11:44 AM

phitruong

10-28-2012, 12:12 PM

according to the article, the home owner did warn the intruder that he armed. the intruder kept coming. think about that scenario a bit. in this case, personally, i'd go with "be judge by 12 instead be carry by 6". on a side note, kinda interesting that the police asked folks for information when the burglar bleed all over the place. wonder if they heard of sniffing dogs.

Krystal Locke

10-28-2012, 12:49 PM

SparkErosion

10-28-2012, 03:41 PM

This is a serious matter and I know this is a standard "joke" in "the dojo" but a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

That aside shouldn't we hope to feel compassion for another human being that has been seriously injured and possibly facing the end of his life? I'm only saying we shouldn't make the fact that someone stabbed a laughable matter.

Lyle, you're absolutely right in my opinion. Right and wrong are subjective , that's why it's an opinion . I'm not trying to bash anyone else. Now, I am only a white belt in aikido, very close to testing gor yellow or 5th kyu in my dojo from white, I've only been doing Aikido 6 months. So, maybe I have no room to talk. I just feel the article and mentality of their actions go against the spirit of Aikido, at least from what I've learned. Unfortunately, in western society , ESP.in America most people (including my family unfortunately) which is quite different from eastern society, ESP. Japan, there is an "eye for an eye" mentality most people have towards people, ESP. "Bad" people like petty criminals who do petty crimes in particular. Rare is the individual such as you 2 who have compassion for another human, criminal or not, are we not all brothers and sisters. People like Gandi, Jesus, and the Bishop and Jean Valgren in the unabridged version of the novel about this very thing: a man steals a loaf of bread to feed his starving children he has to raise all by himself, and his rise through redemption, not through prisons and punishment, but through compassion and love for each other and him, and deep understanding. The first book in the lengthy novel Les Miserables talks about this with the Bishop "beneview" which means "welcome" in French . The novel changed the life of many people. Some quotes from Einstein on this:

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." . And,

May they not forget to keep pure the great heritage that puts them ahead of the West: the artistic configuration of life, the simplicity and modesty of personal needs, and the purity and serenity of the Japanese soul.
Comment made after a six-week trip to Japan in November-December 1922, published in Kaizo 5, no. 1 (January 1923), 339. Einstein Archive 36-477.1. Appears in The New Quotable Einstein by Alice Calaprice (2005), p. 269.

"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence and fulfills the duty to express the results of his thoughts in clear form."

Sincerely, Kevin

Rob Watson

10-28-2012, 04:25 PM

a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it

Please, this is a serious thread.

lbb

10-28-2012, 04:50 PM

Depending on the laws of your state, city, or county you are not allowed, legally speaking, to go after someone, even if they have assaulted you, if there is no eminent threat to you safety. Further more if you can avoid it you have to; meaning that if you specifically engage someone and you had the opportunity to avoid them it is you that is at fault.

Disclaimer: IANAL, but I dated one who specialized in this, so I got an earful on more than one occasion. This is called the "duty to retreat", and while it is generally true that in most situations you have a duty to retreat if you can and if a reasonable person, placed in your situation, would not feel threatened. There are numerous exceptions, however. For example, since we're making generalizations, it's generally not the case that you have a duty to retreat within your own home, if your attacker does not also live there.

(btw, it's "imminent")

robin_jet_alt

10-28-2012, 06:14 PM

a good prosecuter will look at a thread like this and will use it as the "frame of mind" that the man in the article had when he decided to confront the intruder.

A "good" prosecutor will take into account all relevant evidence for and against a conviction and use it to to decide whether to prosecute, and how to prosecute. I don't think anyone would reasonably consider the opinions of complete strangers, from various places around the world, responding to an article in an internet chat room to be a a good indicator of the potential defendant's state of mind.

Michael Hackett

10-28-2012, 09:19 PM

Janet Rosen

10-28-2012, 10:35 PM

"There was an intruder in my house. I was afraid for my life and that of my wife. I grabbed the nearest object and hit the intruder when he came at me. I did not know what the intruder wanted to do, and I was afraid for my life."

Name, rank, and serial number.

Yep.
I always assume that anybody forcibly entering my home intends me harm. How can I prudently assume otherwise?
Being a pacifist a la Ghandi has to do with political strategy and tactics, not with allowing an intruder to run about your home willy nilly and hope he doesn't hurt or kill you.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:05 AM

Sorry Lyle but anyone who goes into a house armed with a knife (whether the couple are elderly or not) deserves all they get.

At no point in the article did it say the intruder was armed with a knife or anything else. That of course doesn't mean that he wasn't. If a person breaks into a home knowing that someone is present; I would be inclined to beleive that the person was very desperate and is more than likely armed.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:09 AM

"There was an intruder in my house. I was afraid for my life and that of my wife. I grabbed the nearest object and hit the intruder when he came at me. I did not know what the intruder wanted to do, and I was afraid for my life."

Name, rank, and serial number.

Just saying it doesn't make it a fact. The article indicates that the man intentionally grabbed the weapon and then sought out the intruder. That doesn't mean he wasn't afraid but the way it is written it sure makes the old man out to be seeking the confrontation.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:17 AM

Lyle, you're absolutely right in my opinion. Right and wrong are subjective , that's why it's an opinion .

I will agree that right and wrong are opinion but it is society as a whole that makes that opinion. That being the law as well as the interpretation of the law. As individuals we may think what we do is right but come to find out the law doesn't agree. The verbiage in the article sure indicates that the police are questioning the homeowner's story.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:24 AM

Disclaimer: IANAL, but I dated one who specialized in this, so I got an earful on more than one occasion. This is called the "duty to retreat", and while it is generally true that in most situations you have a duty to retreat if you can and if a reasonable person, placed in your situation, would not feel threatened. There are numerous exceptions, however. For example, since we're making generalizations, it's generally not the case that you have a duty to retreat within your own home, if your attacker does not also live there.

(btw, it's "imminent")

Thank you Mary, this illustrates my point exactly. The laws are unknown to most civillians and for a lot of civilians while they think they "know" the law they will misinterpret the law thinking they are justified when in fact they are not.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:32 AM

Yep.
I always assume that anybody forcibly entering my home intends me harm. How can I prudently assume otherwise?
Being a pacifist a la Ghandi has to do with political strategy and tactics, not with allowing an intruder to run about your home willy nilly and hope he doesn't hurt or kill you.

A pacifist by no means am I. If someone forcibly enters my home, especially knowing I am there, I too would believe they intended to do me harm. I also have no desire to engage the individual if it isn't necessary.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:43 AM

No, the prosecutor won't pay much attention to what you and I say on any forum UNLESS you or I are the suspect in his case. In this day and age investigators and prosecutors usually look at social media and on-line forums to see if their subject has made relevant statements and will certainly try to introduce them into evidence at trial.

In line with Mary's comments, I strongly recommend that martial arts students research their own local laws regarding self defense. Some states establish a duty to retreat while others don't. There is no simple explanation that cuts across all jurisdictions. You simply have to know and apply the law in your jurisdiction in a situation like this, or you are in grave danger of running afoul of the law even if you feel your actions are reasonable.

I agree that comments made by strangers isn't likely to impact a case like this. I know from my training that a common statement during tanto tori is..."he stabbed himself." The statement the guy in the article made...."he ran onto the knife" This statement alone, in my opinion, would be cause for closer scrutiny. No one just runs onto a knife, as if to stab himself. That would be silly. It seems to me that the Aikido community has that phrase in their vernacular. It probably isn't the best thing to say.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 01:51 AM

Please, this is a serious thread.
Don't you just hate it when they insist on running into the blade?

Followed by...
]It's when they run into it several time it becomes annoying!

Serious indeed.

Krystal Locke

10-29-2012, 03:48 AM

Janet Rosen

10-29-2012, 05:20 AM

Just saying it doesn't make it a fact. The article indicates that the man intentionally grabbed the weapon and then sought out the intruder. That doesn't mean he wasn't afraid but the way it is written it sure makes the old man out to be seeking the confrontation.

What is the alternative you suggest if you are a woman or a senior (the bb in aikido is nice but nobody at 83 has the muscle mass and proprioception of a young fit man) at home and afraid because there is an intruder who may/not be armed and whose intent you prudently must assume is malevolent? To huddle under a bed or in a closet and hope for the best? I'll be grabbing something to enhance my personal capabilities, make use of my superior ability to navigate my home in the dark and hope the decision as to where and how to engage is of my choosing (there is a reason aikido trains to elicit a specific attack).

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 06:18 AM

What is the alternative you suggest if you are a woman or a senior (the bb in aikido is nice but nobody at 83 has the muscle mass and proprioception of a young fit man) at home and afraid because there is an intruder who may/not be armed and whose intent you prudently must assume is malevolent? To huddle under a bed or in a closet and hope for the best? I'll be grabbing something to enhance my personal capabilities, make use of my superior ability to navigate my home in the dark and hope the decision as to where and how to engage is of my choosing .

My suggestion is to get out of the house, if possible. I would also encourage the individual to arm themself with something for defense if the intruder is encountered on the way out. As you said, they have the superior ability to navigate their home in the dark. But certainly I am not saying cower under the bed hoping nothing happens.

As for the 83 year olds muscle mass and proprioception. I doubt the 83 year old could give a 30 year old a run for his money at the gym, either lifting weights or on the treadmill. However, he is a grown man and certainly if he has a blackbelt (and that is all it says in the article so we assume he only has a shodan) that his proprioception is decent. Probably better than someone that doesn't train marital arts.

Beyond that however is the fact that after the intruder jumped off their balcony the article says both seniors were in pursuit. The article doesn't give enough information on this point. Did the seniors jump from the balcony and give chase? (I doubt that.) But if they had to run down a flight of stairs, out the front door, and then after the intruder...again I think proprioception is decent.

Even wounded the intruder was able to out run the old folks but think about this...why did the couple chase after him? The intruder no longer posed a threat to them.

Interestingly enough the article does not mention who called the police and when they were called.

(there is a reason aikido trains to elicit a specific attack).
I do not understand this statement.

Janet Rosen

10-29-2012, 06:27 AM

Even wounded the intruder was able to out run the old folks but think about this...why did the couple chase after him? The intruder no longer posed a threat to them.

Because not everybody stays 100% rational "in the moment" and some of us are by personality (or having been raised in Brooklyn :) ) under stress subject to unwise reactions like "that sucker has my handbag!" (or "who does that young whippersnapper think he is?") which may not be sensible but there you have it...on a rational and legal basis I agree this was foolish but...we are human and yeah I'm guessing they wanted her handbags on principle.

Janet Rosen

10-29-2012, 06:31 AM

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote:
(there is a reason aikido trains to elicit a specific attack).
I do not understand this statement.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. tactics.
In the dojo, nage offers a shoulder or a straight stance or a wrist, or in some styles may initiate an attack. It implies that nage knows there is going to be an attack and is taking the initiative to define when and how.
In home defense situation, I'd take that option rather than hide or evade, allowing the intruder to be in control of where and how he attacks.

Alex Megann

10-29-2012, 06:42 AM

Demetrio Cereijo

10-29-2012, 06:53 AM

Props to Mr Dowdy.

Janet Rosen

10-29-2012, 07:22 AM

This is a very current issue in the UK. The current "coalition" government, which seems to be listing rightwards day by day, has proposed a loosening of the law covering what is a "reasonable" response to an intruder in one's home:

BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19886504)

Alex

From the article:
"Can the intruder be chased if they run off?

"It all comes down to the fundamental question of what was proportionate in the moment and what the householder genuinely believed. If an intruder flees the scene, then at that moment they might not be presenting a threat to the householder any longer. This means that a householder who chases and attacks could no longer be considered to be acting in self-defence. Reasonable force can still be used to recover property or make a citizen's arrest.

"The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has suggested in the past that "a rugby tackle or a single blow would probably be reasonable" because these are designed to stop the criminal, rather than to inflict grievous harm."

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 09:11 AM

In home defense situation, I'd take that option rather than hide or evade, allowing the intruder to be in control of where and how he attacks.

I would agree and go as far as saying it doesn't matter if it is a home defense situation or otherwise. If you need to defend yourself, as the defender, you should defend yourself on your own terms.

Lyle Laizure

10-29-2012, 09:13 AM

Because not everybody stays 100% rational "in the moment" and some of us are by personality (or having been raised in Brooklyn :) ) under stress subject to unwise reactions like "that sucker has my handbag!" (or "who does that young whippersnapper think he is?") which may not be sensible but there you have it...on a rational and legal basis I agree this was foolish but...we are human and yeah I'm guessing they wanted her handbags on principle.

I realize "in the moment" it is difficult to maintain rationality. And I agree with the principle of "how dare this person get away with this if there is something I can do about it." So on this we can agree?

Marc Abrams

10-29-2012, 09:19 AM

It's when they run into it several time it becomes annoying!

I feel sorry for the blade! Without a good cleaning, it could get rusty ;) !

Marc Abrams

Janet Rosen

10-29-2012, 10:53 AM

I realize "in the moment" it is difficult to maintain rationality. And I agree with the principle of "how dare this person get away with this if there is something I can do about it." So on this we can agree?

Sure...esp. as I readily admit it isn't often the advisable path to take!

C. David Henderson

10-29-2012, 01:48 PM

In line with Mary's comments, I strongly recommend that martial arts students research their own local laws regarding self defense. Some states establish a duty to retreat while others don't. There is no simple explanation that cuts across all jurisdictions. You simply have to know and apply the law in your jurisdiction in a situation like this, or you are in grave danger of running afoul of the law even if you feel your actions are reasonable.

I agree. Here in the "wild west," there is no duty to retreat. Perhaps more importantly, the legal doctrine called "defense of habitation" would have provided fairly broad protection to the Dowdy's, and likely would affect a prosecutor's decision whether to go forward with criminal charges.

Here, "defense of habitation" provides even deadly force may be used to prevent the commission of "a felony" within a defendant's home. The felony being prevented is not limited to felonies that pose an immanent risk of death or great bodily harm to the defendant (or another).

A New Mexico jury in a criminal case brought against someone under the facts related likely would receive the following jury instruction (with blanks filled in based on the facts of the case as provided by the use notes):

14-5170. Justifiable homicide; defense of habitation.1

Evidence has been presented that the defendant killed __________________ (name of victim) while attempting to prevent a __________________2 in the defendant's __________________3.
A killing in defense of __________________3 is justified if:

1. The __________________3 was being used as the defendant's dwelling; and

2. It appeared to the defendant that the commission of __________________2 was immediately at hand and that it was necessary to kill the intruder to prevent the commission of __________________2; and

3. A reasonable person in the same circumstances as the defendant would have acted as the defendant did.

The burden is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not kill in defense of __________________3. If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant killed in defense of __________________3, you must find the defendant not guilty.

USE NOTE
1. If this instruction is given, add to the essential elements instruction for the offense charged, "The defendant did not kill in defense of __________________3".

2. Describe the felony being committed or attempted.

3. Identify the place where the killing occurred.

So, local laws do differ in important was. Still, to say that a jury might acquit doesn't mean that it will. If the state disproves that a "reasonable person in the same circumstances as the defendant would have acted as the defendant," the jury should convict.

SteliosPapadakis

10-30-2012, 02:54 AM

In Greece, the article's respective grandfather, would have found himself in handcuffs for defending himself, his loved ones and his property. He then would have to go on and defend himself against all sorts of ridiculous accusations of "wanting to harm the innocent intruder" and the sort. And still, even if thousands would gather outside the court shouting on his support, he would get a prison sentence that he would have to buy out in order to avoid the slammer.
Crappy laws and similar sh*t...
Thumbs up for his courage and persistence!

akiy

10-30-2012, 06:48 AM

Hi folks,

Please keep your tone respectful and please keep your posts explicitly pertinent to aikido in the thread.

Thanks,

-- Jun

lbb

10-30-2012, 06:56 AM

Are you a lawyer, Stelios? Do you have personal experience in these matters?

Cliff Judge

10-30-2012, 08:08 AM

I just don't think knives are very good home defense tools. There is a brandishing factor, of course, but if that fails and you have to use the thing, its a hell of a mess. Carpets will need to be replaced. I expect there will be a lingering smell of blood for years. The knife handle will be slick with blood and it will be hard to hold onto the thing; the weapon could be turned against you.

Demetrio Cereijo

11-10-2012, 02:44 PM

Are you a lawyer, Stelios? Do you have personal experience in these matters?
This is a recent example of the greek law regarding self defense:

A 26-year old Greek woman has become an overnight national hero after setting fire to the genitals of a 23-year old drunken Briton who allegedly tried to sexually assault her in a crowded bar.
...
However, the magistrate and prosecutor also unanimously agreed to set the woman free pending trial, an indication that they accepted her argument that she "acted in justified self-defence".

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/5984266/Hero-Greek-woman-sets-fire-to-drunken-Britons-genitals.html

SteliosPapadakis

11-18-2012, 01:09 AM

Are you a lawyer, Stelios? Do you have personal experience in these matters?

Not a lawyer Mary, yet two of my friends are, one specializing herself in criminal law.
In a village not far away from where i live, a family relative (age 80something, widower who lives alone, his house broken into twice in the last couple of years) sleeps with a shotgun close to his bed.
He wakes up in the middle of the night after hearing noises. He sees a robber at the other end of the room going through his belongings. He shouts at the man, the man takes out a long knife and walks towards the grandpa asking where the money is. Grandpa reaches for the shotgun and shoots the robber.
He then calls for the police.
He ends up in prison, the robber (without any serious wounds, just superficial mostly to the legs) after a month or so in prison is repatriated to his country (after violating the laws of illegal immigration).
After three trials, our relative is released on bail after suffering a stroke in prison.
Now, the problems here are many and their nature complicated enough...
And it is easy to propose solutions or address these problems philosophically.
But an armed attack in your own home remains an armed attack in your own home. And only unless you (touch wood) find yourself in such a difficult situation, can you understand how superficial laws and philosophy can touch such a matter. I really hope nobody ever, EVER, has to deal with such a constipated situation in their lives.

danj

11-28-2012, 03:58 AM

Hi Everyone,
I asked Jutta for some follow up after this traumatic event. Its sobering stuff. here is the link (http://brisbaneaikido.com/2012/11/26/juttas-reflection-son-a-home-invasion/)
best,
dan

Janet Rosen

11-28-2012, 09:16 AM

THANK YOU, Daniel, for the follow up.

Krystal Locke

11-28-2012, 10:14 AM

Hi Everyone,
I asked Jutta for some follow up after this traumatic event. Its sobering stuff. here is the link (http://brisbaneaikido.com/2012/11/26/juttas-reflection-son-a-home-invasion/)
best,
dan

Pretty good read for folks who dont know what a physical altercation or personal assault is like. She has captured the negative side of an adrenaline rush pretty well, and is still clearly feeling some of the psychological effects, jumping from the carpets to the credit cards to the invasiveness of the media to needing the light in the hall on.....

I wonder how her fellow is doing, but she wouldn't be wrong to keep the media off of him. He's got to be dealing with some nasty stuff, too, since he actually injured someone, intentionally or not, self-defense or not.

Sounds like the intruder got caught pretty handily and is where he needs to be....