egafd.com

The courts today decided that Brendon Fearon who was shot by Tony Martin while breaking into his farm has the right to sue him for ?15,000 for the wounds he recieved. It appears that he has been unable to work since his was shot. Is robbery regarded as a occupation these day? Or has he not worked due to the number of convitions he has?



Next we will have criminals sueing the police for the stress caused by been arrested.

Think things are now getting out of hand regarding awarding damages caused by stress.

I cant wait to hear the leader comment on Littlejohn on Tuesday on sky news..........


I often wonder whether the nations judges live in some invisible land where nobody is ever a victim of crime.Compo cultrue here is most probably taking off thanks to thrid rate Lionel Hutz style lawyers and elderly judges who are rapidly descending into senility.

Next we will be having killers suing their victims families because their dying screams are causing them depression.I seem to remember a case where a drunk driver who killed a childs parents and injured the child tried to sue the child,seeing as he or she was now the heir to the parents assets,for injury caused by the crash or something.And there was a case of a teacher in Ireland who was severely beaten by the parents of a boy he abused suing the parents for damages.

Yes.
Completely.

Did anyone see the film 'star chamber' I reckon they had it just about right, till Micky Douglas fucked it up with his bleeding heart lib stuff.

Liz, (hangings to good for em brigade)

So...not a Liberal then , eh? Good.
What are your thoughts on Hanging/Drawing/Quartering?
And should they be made compulsory?

they say justice is blind,pain in the arse morelike

Absolute insanity. Once again the British Justice System does its utmost to make crime an attractive and profitable career choice for those inclined.


The Last Word

Horse-whipping.
It' the only reasoned response........

Lets not fall into the trap of thinking that Martin is a decent local chap who is the victim in this whole thing. His local police were aware that he was a timebomb waiting to go off years before he killed the 15 year old boy. He would often make remarks about shooting "gypsies" and tresspassers and as a result the police formed the opinion that he was a disaster waiting to happen and took his gun licence off him. I read somewhere that the police had spoken to Martin about him threatening someone with a gun previously. The public simpathy for Martin is purely driven by lack of knowledge of the facts and by histerical inaccurate reports in the tabloids. The jury heard all the evidence and decided he was guilty. Not the judge. The jury will be normal people who may have been victims of burglars themselves. Theres a lot more to the story than the Daily Mail and The Suns view on it.

The police had revoked his firearms licence because he had a history of threatening to shoot anyone who wandered onto his land. So he went and got an illegal gun. After he shot the two thieves he went and hid the gun at his mothers house which shows he knew he had overstepped the mark and used unreasonable force. Any normal person would have owned up and said they were defending themselves if that were the case. If he had been in danger he would never have been prosecuted. He knew he was not acting in self defence. The dead kid was shot in the back as they were running away. He had even locked his rottwieler dogs in an outbuilding as he didnt want them to frighten away the burglars before he could shoot them.

Like it or not Mr Martin was the one who committed a violent crime and as such his victim can sue. Fearon may be a thief but Martin is a killer. If you let Martin get away with chasing a 15 year old thief and shooting him in the back as he screamed for his mother then the next step is to allow shopkeepers the right to kill shoplifters. We cant have people running round shooting criminals like Charles fucking Bronson. Fair enough if your under threat but Martin knew the burglars were running away and still went after them and shot them.

And Martins house had no bloody doors and no glass in the windows which struck me as a bit of an invitation. The place was like a bombsite and looked derelict. The mad old country bumpkin. I must be the only person in Britain apart from the police and the jury in the case who has no simpathy with Martin.

Anyway I think Martin looks off his trolley. So my gut instinct is that hes the sort of mad country type who would shoot at ramblers. Get aaarrff moy laaaand!

Most of your musings are correct magoo, I agree Tony Martin knew what he was doing, but he also went through years of abuse by thieves and convicted criminals attempting to break into his home, in fact the police response time to one burglary was ..zero, they didn,t show, allowing Tony Matin to loose the plot and use his illegal weapons.
So Tony Martin is a convicted killer, however Fearon is also a convicted criminal with many offences to his credit as well, so if you believe in the law, once a person has served their time, they have a right to try and re-build thier life and to me their seems little piont in the state telling one criminal where the other one has moved to so the relentless cycle of violence and aggro continues, probably ending in someones death again.
I have little sympathy for either of these people, and I,m sure when fearon co-erced that young lad to burgle Martins farm he could never have known it would end in the lads death, but sadly it did and thats the real tragedy in all this...