Better to be tried by 12.....
Tony needs farm in the USA.
Coming soon to a Hillary-run country near you. VOTE, people!
I feel so sorry for this guy. He had been repeatedly robbed by the same men, because they knew, or thought that they knew, that they could do so with impunity, thanks to the UK government being on the side of the criminals (just like our own is, to some extent, which they’d like to further).
Ping!!! Top of the afternoon to you. I’m sure there’s more than one side to this...
Sounds like someone could make a pretty penny in the UK by being a professional “cleaner”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleaner_%28crime%29
That is, especially those who live in higher crime rural areas would pay a nebulous form of insurance, a small regular fee, so that when and if they kill a burglar or robber, the earthly remains and associated incriminating evidence are removed and repaired expeditiously.
Such things are to be expected when the law and authorities are bad or worthless.
Blushing ever so slightly at my fan club here, lol.
Any questions, fire away.
Pardon the pun.
The Martin case was not about the right to self-defence, which was never in question. The question before the court was whether the actions of Martin on that day, in particular his shooting in the back of an unarmed man who was running away from Martin’s property, could reasonably be seen as self-defence. The judge in his summing up made it clear that the case was finely balanced. The jury clearly found it so, since they only returned a narrow majority verdict after long deliberation. The Court of Appeal also found it so, when it subsequently overturned that verdict and substituted a guilty verdict on a lesser charge. Whatever the rights and wrongs, this was a complex and unusual case for a variety of reasons, not the crude caricature which subsequent mythologising has made it. And Martin himself, unfortunately, was a rather unconvincing martyr.