Guest pelmetman Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-05-04 9:32 PM pelmetman - 2019-05-04 8:52 PM Bulletguy - 2019-05-04 7:30 PM teflon2 - 2019-05-04 7:13 PM Violet1956 - 2019-05-03 11:24 AM Martin’s case is interesting in that he seems to have been let down by his legal team at his first trial in that he had mental health issues which eventually saw his murder conviction reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility by the Court of Appeal. That should have been known about in his first trial. How his case could induce people to believe that the law on self-defence was inadequate to protect the innocent is a mystery to me. His action was more akin to an execution than self-defence. However, there is something to be said about his paranoia which was perhaps exacerbated by his view that the police were ineffectual as regards previous break-ins. There’s a clue in the case for the prosecution in that the police said they believed he had lain in wait for the intruders, you don’t do that if you haven’t experienced previous break-ins. He was both vulnerable and dangerous. You have obviously never fired a 12 bore pump action shotgun. For a start the muzzle flash would have destroyed any nigh vision he had therefore the following shots would have been blind, the noise of a 12 bore fired in the open is so loud that ear defenders are recommended the sound in an enclosed space would have been debilitating his statement that he first fired below the hand holding the torch which is confirmed in that the surviving criminal had leg wounds. The police claim that no shotgun shells were found on the staircase so claiming he did not shoot from there is ridiculous as the spent cartridges would have been ejected to the right of the gun into the passage where they were found . To claim that is was more like an execution shows your ignorance or perhaps I'm wrong and you have witnessed an execution using a 12 bore shotgun. (!) None of which alters the fact 1) it was an illegally held firearm and 2) he shot the youth in the back as he was leaving. My mistake *-) .......... He fires Socialist criminal apologist blanks >:-) ...... Are you disputing the above two proven facts from Martins case? Nope..........I'm proving that you're on the side of those who tried to rob Mr Martin *-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-05-04 9:39 PM Bulletguy - 2019-05-04 9:32 PM pelmetman - 2019-05-04 8:52 PM Bulletguy - 2019-05-04 7:30 PM teflon2 - 2019-05-04 7:13 PM Violet1956 - 2019-05-03 11:24 AM Martin’s case is interesting in that he seems to have been let down by his legal team at his first trial in that he had mental health issues which eventually saw his murder conviction reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility by the Court of Appeal. That should have been known about in his first trial. How his case could induce people to believe that the law on self-defence was inadequate to protect the innocent is a mystery to me. His action was more akin to an execution than self-defence. However, there is something to be said about his paranoia which was perhaps exacerbated by his view that the police were ineffectual as regards previous break-ins. There’s a clue in the case for the prosecution in that the police said they believed he had lain in wait for the intruders, you don’t do that if you haven’t experienced previous break-ins. He was both vulnerable and dangerous. You have obviously never fired a 12 bore pump action shotgun. For a start the muzzle flash would have destroyed any nigh vision he had therefore the following shots would have been blind, the noise of a 12 bore fired in the open is so loud that ear defenders are recommended the sound in an enclosed space would have been debilitating his statement that he first fired below the hand holding the torch which is confirmed in that the surviving criminal had leg wounds. The police claim that no shotgun shells were found on the staircase so claiming he did not shoot from there is ridiculous as the spent cartridges would have been ejected to the right of the gun into the passage where they were found . To claim that is was more like an execution shows your ignorance or perhaps I'm wrong and you have witnessed an execution using a 12 bore shotgun. (!) None of which alters the fact 1) it was an illegally held firearm and 2) he shot the youth in the back as he was leaving. My mistake *-) .......... He fires Socialist criminal apologist blanks >:-) ...... Are you disputing the above two proven facts from Martins case? Nope.......... Good to hear. As for your other bit of nonsense it proves i had the ability to have read and fully understood the case which you failed to, despite two other posters pointing out known facts to you. As i've said elsewhere, your contempt for justice and due process hopefully will one day come back to bite you seriously hard as i'm of the opinion the only way you will ever learn is when you're denied all rights......though i believe for the most part it's all keyboard warrior bolshie bluster with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-05-04 10:14 PM As i've said elsewhere, your contempt for justice and due process hopefully will one day come back to bite you seriously hard Keep on wet dreaming Bullet :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-05-03 11:24 AM Martin’s case is interesting in that he seems to have been let down by his legal team at his first trial in that he had mental health issues which eventually saw his murder conviction reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility by the Court of Appeal. That should have been known about in his first trial. How his case could induce people to believe that the law on self-defence was inadequate to protect the innocent is a mystery to me. His action was more akin to an execution than self-defence. However, there is something to be said about his paranoia which was perhaps exacerbated by his view that the police were ineffectual as regards previous break-ins. There’s a clue in the case for the prosecution in that the police said they believed he had lain in wait for the intruders, you don’t do that if you haven’t experienced previous break-ins. He was both vulnerable and dangerous. Martin was not let down by his legal team at all. He was offered good advice and refused to take it. Tony Martin was an unusual man, probably unbalanced as a result of the former break-ins. This information is from a former Police Officer who was familiar with the facts of the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 5, 2019 Share Posted May 5, 2019 Yes, I found the judgement of the Court of Appeal. I was wrong to surmise that he was let down by his first defence team. The Court of Appeal rejected that argument. The full judgment can be found here https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2001/2245.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.