Tony Martin ‘did what he had to do to protect himself', admits burglar he shot
Tony Martin 'did what he had to do to protect himself' when he shot a burglar dead on his farm in 1999, an accomplice who survived has said.
Martin was charged with murder following the death of 16-year-old Fred Barras and the wounding of 29-year-old Brendan Fearon with a shotgun.
Fearon, who is now 54, said he 'never held any bitterness or animosity' towards Martin, in an interview with the Daily Mirror following the farmer's death last Sunday.
Martin lay in wait for the would-be thieves during the burglary, killing Barras and leaving Fearon with life-changing injuries.
Fearon claimed it was the tenth time Martin's Bleak House farmhouse in Emneth Hungate, Norfolk, was burgled.
He told the newspaper: 'I have never felt any bitterness or animosity toward that farmer. He did what he had to do to protect himself and his home.
'I'm not saying he should have shot someone dead, that's wrong, but he felt persecuted by us and we shouldn't have been there. His place had been robbed 10 times before and it was an easy target. I have no anger.'
Martin was charged with the murder of Barras, but maintained until his death that he acted in self-defence.
The trial ignited a nationwide debate about what measures homeowners can legitimately take to defend their property.
Prosecutors maintained that Martin's actions were premeditated, but the murder charge was dropped to manslaughter and he was jailed for three years. He was released from prison in 2003.
The Crime and Courts Act was passed 10 years later, allowing people a 'householder's defence', if they used reasonable force against an intruder that was not 'grossly disproportionate'.
Fearon also told the newspaper he did not intend to rob Martin, and claimed he and a driver were 'going to help the lad (Barras) sell some of the stuff he had stolen and kept in a lock-up'. They eventually broke into Martin's home.
He also said he thought he was going to die at the hands of Martin.
He added: 'I was injured and hurting but I started rolling across the ground then walking. I thought I was going to die but I kept thinking of my kids and I had to get to safety. I was rolling and walking and zig zagging across the place, it seems I had gone a mile up the road when I came to a house.
'I was gasping for breath and banging on the windows saying 'water, water', and an elderly couple then helped me. They turned on a hose pipe in the garden and I put it to my mouth while they called the ambulance. At the time I had no idea poor Fred was dead. The farmer didn't raise the alarm, he left me to my own fate. I deserved that.
'I later found out he had climbed up a ladder and had been at the top of a tree looking down on us and where he shot his gun at us. It must have been scary for him with intruders, he'd been done so many times before, so you can't blame him.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil can remain in detention, judge rules
The Trump administration can continue to hold anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil at the Louisiana detention facility where he's been locked up since March, a federal judge ruled Friday. Judge Michael Farbiarz had issued a preliminary injunction earlier this week barring the Trump administration from deporting the ex-Columbia University student and ordering his release. On Friday, however, the New Jersey judge determined that federal authorities can continue to hold Khalil on a separate alleged immigration violation discovered after his initial arrest. 3 Farbiarz previously ordered the Trump administration to release Khalil by Friday. Senate Judiciary Committee 'It would plainly be unlawful to detain [Khalil] on a charge the Court preliminarily enjoined,' Farbiarz wrote in his order. 'But by their letter of this afternoon … the [Trump administration] have now represented that [Khalil] is being detained on another, second charge.' 'That second charge has not been preliminary enjoined by the court.' Farbiarz noted that Khalil's legal team has not 'put forward factual evidence as to why it might be unlawful to detain him on the second charge' and 'failed to make meaningful legal arguments as to that second charge.' The second charge accuses Khalil of failing to disclose on his green card application that he was a member of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) and the Columbia University Apartheid Divestment coalition, as well as his work for the Syria Office in the British Embassy in Beirut. 'We are profoundly disappointed that Mahmoud has to bear any more delay and detention from this historically outrageous government conduct,' Baher Azmy, an attorney for Khalil, told Politico. 3 The Trump administration claims Khalil engaged in pro-Hamas activities at Columbia University and hid information about his background on his green card application. James Keivom 3 Khalil has been held in a Louisiana detention facility since March. REUTERS Farbiarz, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, noted that Khalil has 'a number of avenues' for release still available, including filing a bail application with the immigration judge handling his case. 'To the extent the Petitioner requests relief from this Court, the request is denied,' the judge wrote. On Wednesday, Farbiarz determined that it was 'overwhelmingly likely' that the alleged green card application was not the reason for his detainment, but rather Secretary of State Marco Rubio's initial decision to revoke his legal status over his role in anti-Israel protests at Columbia University. The Trump administration claims Khalil engaged in activities 'aligned to Hamas,' the Palestinian terror group, while attending the Ivy League School.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Four migrants escape from ICE detention centre
Four migrants have escaped a detention centre in New Jersey amid reports of a possible uprising. The men, whom authorities say are 'public safety threats', broke out of Newark's Delaney Hall facility on Thursday, where individuals are being held ahead of possible deportation proceedings. According to reports, they were able to push down an outer wall and escape the property, which was recently converted into a detention centre at a cost of $1 billion as part of Donald Trump's mass deportation drive. The men have been identified as Franklin Norberto Bautista-Reyes, Joel Enrique Sandoval-Lopez, Joan Sebastian Castaneda-Lozada and Andres Pineda-Mogollon, who are Honduran and Colombian nationals. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to their arrests. On Thursday night, reports emerged of a possible uprising and breakout at the facility, as protesters, demonstrating against the Trump administration's deportation push, locked arms and pushed against barricades as vehicles passed through the gates. Precisely what unfolded inside Delaney Hall is still unclear. Amy Torres, the executive director of New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, claimed officers had pepper sprayed and dragged protesters away from the facility. Mustafa Cetis, a lawyer acting for one of the migrants, said detainees had turned 'aggressive' and 'violent' amid arguments with authorities over food. 'Based on what he told me it was an outer wall, not very strong, and they were able to push it down,' he continued. DHS said in a statement that it 'has become aware of four detainees at the privately held Delaney Hall Detention facility escaping', adding that 'additional law enforcement partners have been brought in to find these escapees'. Delaney Hall has been the site of clashes this year between Democratic officials, who say the facility needs more oversight, and the authorities. Last month, LaMonica McIver, a Democrat congresswoman, was charged with assaulting federal officers stemming from a skirmish that happened outside the facility after a visit to the centre. Ms McIver said in a statement that she had 'serious concerns about the reports of abusive circumstances at the facility,' and that her office had reached out to immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) for answers. On Friday, Democrat Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark, who has been critical of Mr Trump's immigration crackdown, called for an end to this 'chaos and not allow this operation to continue unchecked'. 'We are concerned about reports of what has transpired at Delaney Hall this evening, ranging from withholding food and poor treatment, to uprising and escaped detainees,' he said. In a statement issued on Friday, American Friends Service Committee said people inside the facility reported getting small portions of food, with breakfast at 6am, dinner at 10pm and no lunch. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
In NCLA Amicus Win, Supreme Court Revives Innocent Family's Suit over FBI's Wrong-House Raid
Curtrina Martin, et al. v. United States of America, et al. Washington, DC, June 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' dismissal of Martin v. United States, an Atlanta family's Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) suit against the government for a wrong-house raid in 2017. FBI agents invaded the home of Trina Martin and her family, shackling her partner on the floor and holding a half-naked Ms. Martin at gunpoint, while she expressed concern for her seven-year-old son's safety elsewhere in the house. One big problem: the FBI SWAT team had knocked down the door of the wrong home, on the wrong street, because the agent in charge had failed to verify its clearly marked address. The Justices remanded the case to the Eleventh Circuit for reconsideration. As NCLA's amicus curiae brief urged, the Eleventh Circuit should ultimately rule on remand that the FTCA does not shield the government from liability when federal law enforcement officers raid the wrong house. Ms. Martin and her family filed FTCA claims against the government for assault, battery, and false imprisonment, as well as Fourth Amendment claims against the individual FBI agents. The Eleventh Circuit below upheld the district court's dismissal of the case, concluding that the agents' actions violated no 'clearly established' law. It ruled that the family suffered harm resulting from an agent's 'discretionary act' (i.e., failing to check the house address), warranting total governmental immunity and no path to relief for the Martin family. The Eleventh Circuit also determined that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution could shield the FBI and its agents from FTCA suits. NCLA's amicus brief forcefully argued that the Eleventh Circuit's mode of inquiry—which departed from the analytical process employed by all sister circuits—was inconsistent with the language and intent of the FTCA. Congress amended the FTCA in 1974 expressly to ensure that innocent people subjected to wrong-house raids and similar abuses by federal law enforcement officers would have a cause of action to sue. By expanding the FTCA's discretionary-function exception to encompass wrong-house raids such as this one, the Eleventh Circuit's decision effectively nullified the 1974 law. As Justice Sotomayor underscored in her concurrence (joined by Justice Jackson), 'Courts … should not ignore the existence of the [1974 amendment], or the factual context that inspired its passage, when construing the discretionary-function exception. … [A]ny interpretation should allow for liability in the very cases Congress amended the FTCA to remedy.' Today's Supreme Court ruling does not decide whether the 'discretionary function' exception applies in this case, an issue that the Court ordered the Eleventh Circuit to resolve, but the Justices found that the Supremacy Clause is not a defense the government may invoke in FTCA lawsuits. Justice Gorsuch explained in his opinion for the Court: 'The FTCA is the 'supreme' federal law addressing the United States' liability for torts committed by its agents. It supplies the 'exclusive remedy' for damages claims arising out of federal employees' official conduct.' NCLA released the following statements: 'The Supreme Court rightly held that innocent civilians should not be stripped of any meaningful remedy when they suffer abuse at the hands of federal law enforcement. The Martin family deserves their day in court. On remand, NCLA trusts that the Eleventh Circuit will carefully evaluate what qualifies as 'reasonable' law enforcement—and recognize that a trained FBI agent who fails to check a clearly marked house number before commencing a raid because 'it was dark outside' does not qualify.'— Casey Norman, Litigation Counsel, NCLA 'Law enforcement officers should not be able to evade accountability for entering the wrong house and terrorizing an innocent family in the middle of the night when Congress intentionally provided for redress in cases against the federal government in such circumstances. Thankfully, the Supreme Court's decision reaffirms that the Eleventh Circuit was wrong to preclude relief in this case and others like it.'— Jenin Younes, Litigation Counsel, NCLA 'All too often, court-created doctrines are used to reduce the government's liability to people whose civil liberties it has violated. Congratulations to our friends at the Institute for Justice for convincing the Supreme Court to clip the wings of such a doctrine in this case—at least where Congress had explicitly created a cause of action to sue.'— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA For more information visit the page here. ABOUT NCLA NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholar Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLA's public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americans' fundamental rights. ### CONTACT: Joe Martyak New Civil Liberties Alliance 703-403-1111 in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
