ACT Policing has charged two juvenile males following an aggravated burglary in Chisholm on Friday (February 15).
Police attended a residence in Chisholm in response to reports of an aggravated burglary. They found damage to the property including holes in the interior plaster walls, graffiti, and paint poured and thrown on floors and walls throughout the house.
The alleged offenders are understood to have gained entry to the residence through the rear of the house.
Following police investigations a 13-year-old boy and a 14-year-old boy, both from Chisholm, were charged with aggravated burglary and damage property offences.
The two young men will face the ACT Children’s Court at a later date.
[Courtesy ACT Policing]
Loading ...
I wouldn’t describe 13 & 14 year olds as “young men”!
Prepare the WristSlapper 3000 with Wet Noodle Flickatron accessories.
Kim F said :
Quite right,more like budding bastardos!
They’ll be sent to bed without their supper!
I can understand straight burglary for profit, but pointless destruction like that described is simply beyond my ken. In my mind in removes these critters from the realm of humanity into the arena of those who look like humans but aren’t. The American firearms authority Jeff Cooper used to refer to them as Goblins, and I tend to agree with him.
“Nothing like a nice piece of hickory”.
How Canberran
A couple of kids broke into a house and did some puerile damage. Now they’re charged with Aggavated Burglary and are labelled “young men”.
Hands up anyone who didn’t break the law when they were a teenager. Yep, breaking into a house is probably at the more serious end, but they’re hardly mass murderers (though The System might try to fix that).
It would be interesting to know who phoned the police and said “I’m reporting an aggravated burglary”. I sounds like it was Aggravated only by dint of there being two of them. It used to be that Aggravated meant “with violence” or “armed”. Now the majority of burglaries are classified as Aggravated because the definition has been widened so much.
IP
ScienceRules said :
Lol but not lol.
You have pretty much explained exactly whats gonna happen. Sadly.
IrishPete said :
Wow I have seen you make some pretty outlandish comments before, ip, but this takes the cake. Break and enter then do malicious damage is not far off rape or murder. The home owners have been completely violated.
Honestly dude, if you think it’s no big deal then why not advertise your address for any future scum thinking of doing this can just come to yours while you happily watch knowing that these poor souls are just *doing some puerile damafe*
Would you just sit their and let them trash you house?
IrishPete said :
what a load of rubbish
Im sorry, but have you thought about the real offenders in this matter?i mean those people who live at the house deserve to have there house broken into by these two ‘young men’. they also deserve to have there possessions stolen and the rest of there house trashed.Who needs walls without holes in it?And im sure the walls needed another coat of paint on them. And im sure the beautiful artwork they did on the floor will be worth thousands some day! Selfish scrumbags home owners
or real world. The little kids broke into the house with the apparent intent to cause as much damage as possible and are little shits. they are 13 and 14, they are old enough to know the difference between right and wrong and the excuse of ‘they are just kids’ isnt good enough to the rest of society. yes they arent murders, but they are shits. And yes they were probably charged with aggravated burglary because they were together. Its the law, but hey, lets not that get in the way of a good story.
IrishPete said :
You aren’t seriously trying to trivialise what these little scumbags did, are you?
IrishPete said :
It is aggravated because they attempted to destroy the house in the process of stealing stuff. Had they left the walls and carpets intact and unmarked it wouldn’t have been as bad. If the same youths had been shoplifting and got nabbed it would be a good talking to. If they shoplifted and threw items from shelves, spilled tomato sauce all over the aisles and broke the windows on the way out it makes it much more severe due to the cost of cleanup.
Kids or not, nobody goes and does this without knowing the consequences of their actions. Or maybe they do and therein lies the problem, the law can’t touch ‘em. I hope the kids’ parents have to foot the repair bill and bring their wrath upon these lowlifes. I know the magistrate won’t, so someone has to.
LSWCHP said :
Similarly bemused.
I was burgled once by a very considerate thief (theives?). It could hardly be described as breaking and entering because they didn’t do any damage on the way in, removed a wallet with some cash and a phone, and then left without making a mess. Didn’t even twig I’d been robbed until around 10 hours later.
Contacted the cops, really just in case I needed to file an insurance claim. They didn’t seem too interested, fair enought they have serious crimes to investigate.
Overall I didn’t leave the situation bearing any particular malice to the perp(s).
By contrast, if they’d deliberately inflicted pointless property damage like throwing paint on the walls etc then I’d want blood.
IrishPete said :
Have you ever been burgled?
Having someone violate your personal space is quite confronting. Add to that the fact that these little darlings broke in purely to trash the place, including many of the owners personal posessions, no doubt.
That is the reason, I think, that the charges were “aggravated burglary”. Violence against the owners of the house, via the house itself.
While I agree that they’re not exactly mass murderers, I’m not sure if you’d be so quick to label the damage “purile” if it was your house, and you’d probably be calling for the book to be thrown at them.
IrishPete said :
So it should all be put down to teenage hijinks, just a couple of lads out for a bit of fun?
Coming home to holes punched in walls, graffitti and paint poured on the floor and walls would be a traumatic experience for the owners. It was senseless destruction on the part of the little sods and I, for one, would like to see them publicly pilloried before a trip to the big house.
But let’s not forget, they are from bad homes, never had a chance, mentally ill probably, been let down by the education system, not had sufficient social support and mentoring, ‘substance abuse issues,” daddy didn’t hug them enough..etc etc ad nauseum.
Better let them go free, with a warning not to do it again…
It’s pretty simple, aggravated just means with a weapon or in the accompany of one or more people.
Pfft 13 & 14…. All they’ll get is a slap on the wrist.
The should be made liable for the costs to repair the home they trashed… Maybe they’ll learn some respect and the value of money and possessions..
I can see it from both sides. On the one hand, I can see myself doing something like this when I was that age. A time when excitement and fun didn’t come in a bottle, when you wanted to appear cool and impress the older kids, and those older kids could easily influence you.
Most importantly, though they definitely knew right from wrong, I don’t think these kids would really understand the consequences of their actions from the perspective of the home owners. I think that kind of empathy is lost on kids of that age, because of their limited experiences and because of their lack of emotional development.
On the other hand, I know that if some kids broke into my house and destroyed my belongings and my sense of space for nothing more than the thrill of destruction, I would be livid. I would probably want nothing more than to go to their rooms and destroy every single thing that they own.
So yeah, I’m torn. The easy way out is to simply be angry. The hard way out is to see it from their perspective and to try and understand it. These kids probably have the potential to be just as sane and rational as you or I, but because of many factors that we don’t know they’ve done something like this. And YOU might have done the same thing if your upbringing and experiences were the same as theirs.
To those that don’t understand why this was an “Aggravated Burglary”, its a burglary because they illegally entered a residence and its aggravated by there being more than one of them. A Burglary could also be a person who opens your front door with a key he found under your doormat, walks in, sits down at your dinner table, so far has caused no damage or harm, but still burglary, if hes then found to have a weapon on him, have one or more other persons with him or the house is the residence of a pregnant woman, then it becomes an Aggravated charge.
The Dark said :
According to the ACT Criminal Code:
Aggravated burglary
A person commits an offence (aggravated burglary) if the person—
(a) commits burglary in company with 1 or more people; or
(b) commits burglary and, at the time of the burglary, has an
offensive weapon with him or her.
bundah said :
Whats your point? that’s what I said
Genie said :
Perhaps consideration should be given to making mummy and daddy pay. Parental responsibility for the ‘kids’ would suddenly take on a whole new meaning.
How Canberran.
buzz819 said :
Correct. I think someone being home counts too. (and violence, even without a weapon – violence to property is not violence, and trivialises the term “violence”).
IP
How_Canberran said :
Yes, great idea. Where did you think your kids were? Parental responsibility is what should be being discussed here, not the responsibility of kids barely old enough to understand the gravity of their actions. Google Doli Incapax.
By the way, to everyone else – yes I have been burgled. Yes I have had a car stolen. Yes I have been randomly assaulted by a stranger. No, none of that means I believe in the death penalty or the stocks for young teenagers engaged in stupid, selfish behaviour. Teenagers, especially boys, test the limits, take risks – these boys (not “young men”) will almost certainly have learned where the limits are now, and like most teenagers will “grow out of” crime and risk-taking. But if you lock them up in a juvenile detention centre with hardened offenders, older than them, I can virtually guarantee they will not grow out of it.
I can’t see a single response to my suggestion that people put their hands up if they didn’t break the law when they were a teenager. You almost certainly did. I did. That crime had a victim. But now you are Holier Than Thou.
IP
IrishPete said :
OK. I didn’t break the law as a teenager. But who cares? It’s not about breaking any laws it’s about breaking laws related to aggravated burglary If you asked “Who didn’t break into houses and smash them up as a teenager” then you I imagine you would have got a pretty large response.
At the age of 14 I knew that going into peoples houses and stealing and destroying their property was The Wrong Thing To Do, so I didn’t. These clowns should know that as well.
The Dark said :
Indeed although perhaps you can tell me where your reference to pregnant women in relation to aggravated burglary can be sourced?
LSWCHP said :
Unless they’re totally braindead i’m sure they’re fully aware that they’re doing the wrong thing however identifying the reasons for their behaviour is problematic for who really knows why they’re motivated to be anti-social?
bundah said :
Perhaps you can tell us more about the offence insomuch as what else constitute aggravated burglary? (Hint – there are literally thousands of things). ?? Is it possible to commit this offence and yet never enter the building or part of it? Picking on teenagers is hardly useful big guy.
bundah said :
Or if in fact they are even motivated by anything. But why is it problematic? Im sure there has to be a reason, even if they don’t know it. No one is just born anti social, but for maybe yourself.