Fearon didn't sue him - the application was dropped when Martin's lawyers made a counter-claim. If you think Tony Martin is such a great bloke, then maybe you should tell that to Anne Masters, the woman whom he stalked in 1976 and terrorised with a handgun. She was so traumatised that she cannot bring herself to speak about it to this day. Or to his brother Robin, who moved to Australia after Martin threatened to shoot him, then blew the windows of his house in with a 12-bore. The public image of Tony Martin as the Frightened Old Man is just half the story. He is in fact a bully and a coward who used guns on several previous occasions to threaten innocent people and destroy their property. Martin may have been the victim that night, but he is far from a saint and when he was sent down for murder it was not a travesty of justice, but karma. He is not my idea of a hero, my friend.

We said that at the time.

He is guilty. He shot and killed someone. How is he not guilty? They were guilty of attempted theft. He was guilty of killing a teenager. Quite simple, really.

​@@douglasfreeman3229Brendan Fearon had been to Bleak House and had Burgled Tony Martin before. He also Attempted to Sue Tony Martin for £15,000 for Alleged Life Changing Injuries when there is Nothing Wrong with Him. Brendan Feardon also Continued to Commit Crime when He was Released from Jail. Fred Barras the 16 Year Old Thief was being Trained to be a Career Criminal. Tony Martin was Faced with Intruders in His Home and not for the First Time. Barras and Feardon would have Injured or Killed Him it was 100% Self Defence.

​@douglasfreeman3229 he was defending his home and as far as he knew,his life aswell, its a shame he didn't get the other rat that got away

@@douglasfreeman3229if the little bastards weren’t breaking into and robbing an elderly/vulnerable man he wouldn’t have been shot, it’s his own fault

Fighting back? Shooting a teenager with a shotgun? You call that fighting back? Did the teenagers attack him, then?

​@@douglasfreeman3229are You Related to Fred Barras or Brendan Feardon is that why You are Defending the Career Criminal Scum ?

​@douglasfreeman3229 they had broken into his house several times before,he had just had enough,maybe those teenagers should have been better humans then one of them wouldn't be 6 feet under, its a shame he didn't get the other one aswell,as they both deserved it

​@@douglasfreeman3229I can't wait for your house to get burgled to see how you react

The tragedy in this situation is that the thieves broke into a house that was dark, and it remained dark. Tony Marin early on said that the only light in the house was in the bedroom. Poor guy must have been about to soil his pants. That statement Tony Martin made, "Stand your ground," is the name of a law in Florida, USA, wherein it's stipulated that if you're in fear of your life, you have the right to use lethal force. Although, some have tried to use this defense when it's obvious it doesn't apply, but in Tony Martin's situation, IMHO, it does. I don't own a weapon, therefore, if burglars siege my home, I will earnestly pray they leave me alone.

I wandered onto someone's property quite innocently when I lost my way hiking at night. Wanted to ask directions. Thankfully the owner of the property was not a mentally ill gun-wielding nutter who opened fire, but a reasonable and rational man who kept hidden and shouted "Explain yourself!", first. I did and I am alive and he is not doing time.

​@@douglasfreeman3229You are an Enabler.

​@@douglasfreeman3229 they had burgled his house a few times prior, plus they didn't knock on his door looking for directions,they broke into his property 🤦‍♂️

That's precisely the point, Sir: the court found he was NOT defending himself, but had acted out of revenge for previous break-ins at his home. Martin knew this, and told a pack of lies in an attempt to disguise his actions as legitimate self-defence, but the forensic evidence and witness testimony from after the shooting proved beyond doubt that his version of events could not be true. Ultimately Martin was jailed for exactly the same reason that thousands are sent down every year: the evidence told a different story and jury did not believe him. Every coin has two sides, my friend, and things are rarely as simple as they seem.

They also Police could ve gotten a psychologist for the poor man ! when They put him in Jail and wanted to interrigate him. He was clearly not able to cope

You might want to tell that to Anne Masters, the woman Tony Martin stalked and terrorised with a firearm so badly that she cannot bring herself to talk about him today; or to his brother Robin, whom he threatened to kill and then blew the windows of his house in with a 12 bore. Martin may have been the victim on this occasion, but he had been involved in a string of firearms-related incidents dating back to 1976, and he definitely is not the saint his supporters like to believe. When he was locked up for murder it was not a travesty of justice, but karma.

Maybe so. But it doesn't relieve you of the obligation to act reasonably, which he most assuredly did not.

The police officer who provided my firearm training said Rule #1 - never call out a warning or fire a warning shot if someone is inside your home.

@@cyndeetaylor What reason did he give for that, and which country do you live in?

@@MSM4U2POM Have you been burgled? EXPERT?

@@tankthelord1178 Relevance?

Well, the number zero rule is don't break the law in the first place! And it would take one hell of an attorney to get you off shooting two unarmed men in the back as they are trying to escape through a window (ever heard of reasonable force, Mr Martin?). This bloke was just a fool who did all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons, and then tried to weasel his way out of by lying through his teeth in court. Like many on these threads, I would like to see UK self-defence laws relaxed to make it easier for homeowners to know what you can and cannot do in these situations, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon as long as idiots like Tony Martin continue to behave as though the law does not apply to them.

"I would have done the same thing if I was in his position." If you mean defend yourself, I'm sure most of us would. But Martin is a shining example of how not to do it, and it is not surprising he lost in court. He refused to change his testimony even when his own lawyers and the prosecution were in full agreement that a crucial part of it simply could not be true. Jurors are only human, and why they sense someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes, they don't take kindly to it. The forensic evidence was conclusive that a key part of Martin's verson of events was false - not just beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt at all - and coupled with witness statements about his attitudes and behaviour before the shooting, the convergence of evidence strongly supported the Queen and discredited Martin. So Martin was jailed for exactly the same reason that thousands of people are convicted every single year: the prosecution case fit the provable facts better than the defence's, and the jury did not believe him. The notion that he was some kind of victim of a flawed legal system is utter codswallop, in my opinion. He was convicted on the basis of evidence, not emotion, and if he was a victim at all then it is only of his own stupidity.

Welcome to Soviet Britain

They tried to take objects. He took a life. You can't see what's wrong? So, you value property more than you value life?

​@@douglasfreeman3229You're Clueless. 🤦‍♀️

​@@douglasfreeman3229I value my property more than a scummy thief's life

We'll they knew the risks before they broke into someone's property

​@@douglasfreeman3229 He valued his own life, that's what you refuse to see. Thankfully the law is now on his side and not the criminals. If you break into someone's house you have only yourself to blame if you get killed.

"Guys, can you stop being mean and put my things back"

I wouldn't attempt a citizen arrest anywhere on this planet.😆

Not in modern Britain. Theft, assault, burglary, ok. Saying mean words to someone online; not ok.

There is a massive difference, both morally and legally, between bona-fide self-defence and revenge. The court found that the primary motive for Martin's actions was revenge for previous break-ins at his home. Revenge is never a valid defence for taking life, either in Britain, or any other western democracy that I am aware of. These cases are rarely as simple as they seem, so please acquaint yourself with the facts before making sweeping statements that have nothing to do with the reasons why Martin was jailed.

When you invade someone's home, you leave your human rights at the door.

Don't be silly. Your home is not some kind of legal vacuum, and even in the most gun-friendly of the United States homeowners are still bound by rules and can go to prison if they are broken. Some states have "Castle Doctrine" and/or "Stand Your Ground" laws which give them far greater latitude, but they are still limited and certainly not a blank cheque to do whatever you like. Often the onus is on the prosecution to prove a defendant did not act in self-defence, but I have yet to find one state where the requirement to use reasonable force does not apply. The stipulation that a defendant must act in lawful self-defence and use reasonable force is a fundamental requirement of just about every western judicial system, and definitely not unique to the UK.

"Let the man stand his ground". There is no duty of retreat in England, my friend.

It's Britain. Common sense isn't exactly widespread

@@phat_dike ah! Common sense isn't that common...

But using unreasonable force is not.

@@MSM4U2POM I hope neither you or I ever find ourselves in such awkward situation. God bless you.

Disturbing to think that there are so many nutters like Martin out there who value rusty old farm crap more than human life.

Agreed. Nasty piece of work.