Tony Martin TV show....

Message

Jon Tilson · #1 Post by **Jon Tilson** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:57 am

Anyone esle see that? Very interesting bit of telly which went some way to explaining how poor old Tony Martin got sent down for shooting burglars. It also showed how completely off beam the newspaper reports of the incident were at the time... 
I had no idea that he shot 2 of them...thought it was just the one...that there were 3 burglars...that the one who dies managed to crawl away into the undergrowth to lay undiscovered til the next day...and that he didnt call the police himself... 
Also the media reported him as being a bit simple.... 
I thought he was lucid and of average marbles if a little eccentric... 
His behaviour post incident was strange...but not damningly so. I wouldnt much care to spend more time in a house with possible stray burglars in the garden. But I didnt buy the...just found the gun in my car boot one day.... bit at all. Think that sunk him. And if you feel like shooting a burglar, dont say it out loud to a copper... 
 
My take?...well the loss of any young life is a tragedy. But if you choose such lousy friends beware the consequences. Shame it wasnt the driver, the young lad then may have just got a salutory lesson in how crime doesnt pay and the structural low life criminal a more fitting outcome. 
 
Tony Martin was probabaly just a victim of his own eccentric personality and justice since seems now to have been served while the intial verdict, though understandable was severe. 
The law as it stands seems okay to me.... 
The press used this case to misrepresent it. 
 
Jonners

redrichie · #2 Post by **redrichie** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:22 pm

I didn't see it, but I lived near the area at the time. The way the popular Press reacted was not surprising. There had been quite a few other break-ins at remote farm houses, and it was fairly obvious through the MO that most of these had been carried out by the same gang. 
 
The use of lethal force is a moral question that pops up fairly regular in my line of work. I personnally would be quite comfortable with pulling the trigger on someone who was commiting an act endangering or likely to endanger life. Shooting a burglar in the back as they are leaving your property...hmm...no thanks. Items and goods can be replaced, life cannot. 
 
Which brings me on nicely to another misconception i'll throw in here that really winds me up. Every time the police/security forces use firearms (the brazilian on the tube or in Iraq are two in the media at the moment) why does the Daily Mail ask if they are operating a "shoot-to -kill" policy? This isn't a computer game where you get more points for a headshot, nor can you try to "wing" them or "take a leg out" which always makes me grin when i hear it. The object is to stop the target doing whatever s/he is doing as quickly as possible, not to "kill" the target. Quickest way? Centre of mass. If the target is unlucky, the round goes through his heart. 
 
Ahhh, and while i am in rant mode....very unfortunate about the guy on the tube, but i'll tell you something....If you were the policeman with the voice in your ear saying you had the right target, and he was likely to be carrying explosives, and he had just leaped the ticket barrier and jumped onto a packed tube train.....would you have pulled the trigger?

algtj · #3 Post by **algtj** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:57 pm

I am sure some of those words I've heard before! 
In the heat of the moment no one knows how they would react. 
IE; he must have been shocked and angry that he had intruders in his property. 
Under fire, now that is a different set of circumstances which need to be assessed in the heat of the moment. 
Confused!? 
If anybody is privvy to the rules of engagement of service personnel in the UK and Overseas, they will understand we are not free to slot any goddamn Motherfu**er that moves! 
Yes Ladies and Gentlemen even war is moving into the courtrooms. 
As for the guy on the tube Ritchie, are you aware that the chap concerned recieved no less than seven rounds off nine mill in the swede? 
We both know two rounds of nine at point blank will stop most things and the mess they will make at that range. 
I can only summise that more than one person pulled a trigger at the same time, or the person who pulled the trigger went into shock at the first two rounds impact. 
Maybe the training recieved was lacking...... I don't know as I am no expert in civilian firearms training. 
We will never know for sure. 
One thing I am sure of, right or wrong, the guy/s who pulled the trigger/s have to get up each morning and face another day with that mess indellably etched. 
Mr Martin and the Police officers. 
 
Al W 

Edited by: <A HREF=http://p206.ezboard.com/bthetriumphdolo ... b>algtj</A> at: 17/3/06 8:00 pm

Reg · #4 Post by **Reg** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:46 pm

Yep,it was a shame about the Brazilian on the tube..but,he was ordered FIVE times to stop,and even leap over the ticket machines to make it to the platform.. I'm not saying this justifies it,but you can see how it got to this point..if a copper with a gun ever told me to stop,anywhere in the world and no matter what the situation...i'd bloody well stop..

Carsreunited · #5 Post by **Carsreunited** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:08 pm

He didn't leap the barriers. That was a public misconception. It was a plain clothes officer that leapt the barrier. 
 
There are facts that haven't been released in the press which would explain why he may have refused to stop. It may come out at a later date but as with all these things, just be wary about making a judgement based on something you have read in the media. I myself am subject of a story that is running in the press and you wouldn't believe the complete inaccuracy of some of the accusations. I can't do anything about it yet and will have to wait for the right time for those allegations to be put straight. 
 
The Tony Martin thing. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. If they were running away from him at the time he shot them, there is nothing to say that they wouldn't of turned around after arming themselves with something in another room. Horrible position to be in for him. Theiving gits should stay out of people's houses if they don't want to risk their lives.

algtj · #6 Post by **algtj** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:51 pm

It's fantastic to see people's views on this. 
There is definately a civilian/uniformed view on this subject which is broadly separated by the press and their interpretation of events. 
Chinese wispers as children is amplified in adulthood.....

redrichie · #7 Post by **redrichie** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:20 am

the brazilian on the tube.... 
 
i do know a few of the facts....probably more than you're ever likely to see in the press...now the amount of rounds fired may seem excessive to you sat in front of your keyboard, but i can assure you, if you had been told that the guy in front of you was carrying explosives with the intent of turning himself into a martyr and a whole tube train would go with him, then no matter how much training you have had, I'm pretty sure that you will use every means at your disposal to prevent this. The trigger man is only human after all, and a basic human instinct is to defend yourself against a preceived threat. Like I said earlier, this isn't a playstation game, you get no second chances. 
 
I still don't see the justification in killing someone because they are trespassing/burgling your household. I honestly find it amazing that some people find this an acceptable course of action. Reminds me of the Arnie film > 
 
"Uzi 9mm...prefect for home defence" <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... s/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"> 
 
I think this has turned into another "Dolly Club puts the world to rights thread", but it's good that people who chat primarily about cars feel comfortable to discuss these kind of subjects. Life would be boring if all we talked about were spark plug tubes and voltage stabilizers.. 
 
<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... s/roll.gif ALT=":rollin">

redrichie · #8 Post by **redrichie** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:24 am

ahh, i'm not going to edit it, but the controller told the officers that the target had jumped the gate...wether he had or not means nothing to the officers chasing him. They believed that the target had, which can help you understand the state of mind they were in when they caught up with him. Who told the controller that...well...i don't know, and I suspect nobody ever will. 
 
sorry if that wasn't clear.

davepoth · #9 Post by **davepoth** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:48 am

Horrible situation for the officers on the ground, and every armed response officer in general, to be in. I couldn't have a job where I was employed to shot people but got taken to court every time I did.

Jon Tilson · #10 Post by **Jon Tilson** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:38 am

This was about the Tony Martin programme which clarified to me why he ended up getting sent down and actually restored my faith in the law as it stands. 
 
The unfortunate demise of Mr De Menezes is a whole other subject...I'll deal with that in a minute. 
 
We are all allowed to use reasonable force to defend ourselves in our own home....even including as I understand it the use of firearms. That is a good thing. 
It seems to me that Tony Martin did use reasonable force although obvioulsy at the upper limits of this and had he conducted himself differently at the time he may well have had a successful defence or not even have been prosecuted in the first place. It seems to me that his conviction raised a lot of questions and the law found a solution in his eventual appeal. 
 
As to Mr De Menezes...he was shown on video walking through the barrier, picking up a Metro...sitting on the carriage even although that may be a reconstruction. 
 
(I saw the armed response unit on the way as I was driving round Elephant and Castle at the time. I had a long walk after the July 7 bombing and took the car for the next few days so I was aware of the mood in London at the time) 
 
He wasnt even challenged....just shot. An innocent man....going about his business. 
 
I dont care about the circumstances. I know about them all too well. BUT this sets a precedent that makes me now feel very uneasy about the country I live in... 
 
Incomptence, cover up, state authorised murder. This is the United Kingdom for goodness sake! Once upon a time the head of the Met would have resigned. I honestly dont know how he can still sit at his desk.... 
I dont know how the politicians can actually let him. 
 
We didnt just loose an innocent Brazilian electrician that day. We ALL lost one hell of a lot more.... 
 
 
Jonners

Silvery · #11 Post by **Silvery** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:56 am

Quite simply, burglars would tend not to be shot in their victims homes if they didn't go in the homes to start with. 
 
So while the gun in the Marin case may have been illegal, and he may have shot the kid in the back, the kid was hardly an innocent shining youth sitting at home with a mug of Horlicks after a night helping old ladies home from the bingo. 
 
As for the tube incident, we don't know all the facts but it certainly seems the "facts" we did know (and some still think they know) may have been lies, and what little of the actual facts we do know point towards a frightening and gross level of incompetance on the part of the surveilance team. Once he'd been wrongly identified the umpteen rounds to the head (why only after he'd boarded the train? What if he'd had a "dead mans handle", what was done to stop him?) and being "of foreign appearance" certainly didn't help, but it was the initial mistake that killed him. 
 
That incident has certainly raised a lot of questions in my mind though - Why did he have "a rucksack and thick coat", that then became an Ipod (that might explain him not hearing people, if it is indeed the case he was wearing one) and denim jacket? Why was he allowed to cross quite a large are if he was a suspected bomber? Why was he allowed on the train? Did anyone in uniform try to stop him (would anyone really stop and wait for someone in plain clothes brandishing a gun to produce ID, or would they run like hell?)? Is running for hte train becuase you're late now an offence punishable by death, or are you safe so long as you don't "look like a terrorist", whatever that means? 
 
The following week I ran along Hyde park in a heavy jacket, with sweets falling out a hole in my pocket, on a very hot day (was going to see Queen, the Dolly had probs, as I posted at the time, and I had my camera and refreshments tucked in various pockets hence needing the jacket). Was I not shot (or even approached) because I'm white, or because this time the security forces were being less trigger happy in general? 
 
So, a man is a murderer for defending his home (and posibly life, who knows?) against those who break in, but when an innocent man is running for the tube it's merely unfortunate he's assasinated by the state for being in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong skin. 
 
Doesn't make me sleep any easier if that's the situation we're living in...

redrichie · #12 Post by **redrichie** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 am

Jonners and Silvery, you both make good points, and I do understand that an entirely innocent man was killed. I don't have the vocabulary to express how i would feel if it was a member of my family, but as a citizen of the United Kingdom, lets just go as far to say it was extremely regrettable. 
 
The only point I was making was that the person who pulled the trigger did it in good faith, with all the best intentions. I know that that will mean very little to the dead mans family. Neither am I that naive to think that there will not be some cover-up along the way, and a scapegoat for the clusterfuck be found. 
 
Back to the thread subject matter however. How can you villify a public appointed and trained person for doing his job to the best of his intentions, whilst in the next breath openly support a man who uses lethal force on a burgler fleeing from his property? 
 
Please be aware, i'm not trying to anger people here or fish for responses, i'm just interested in how others view these matters. I honestly don't know how I would react if i found a burgler on my property, with my wife and children tucked up in bed...I suspect that i would choose the same road as Mr Martin.

algtj · #13 Post by **algtj** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:06 am

Do we allow our social fabric to go the way of the 'land of the free?' 
 
Do we allow people 'The right to bare arms?' 
 
Do we issue rules of engagement? 
 
I don't think so. Mr Martin did what most of us would have done, pre meditated......!? 
Our rules of engagement would not allow us to do this. 
As for baring arms, I work with people who should not have the right to bare a bloody pencil! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... ns/mad.gif ALT=">:"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /happy.gif ALT=":D"> 
The percieved threat has changed, due partly to the media and to our own insecurities. 
Gone are the days of the terrorist having an Irish accent. 
Today we are facing a terrorist who does not value life and is therefore an entirely different threat willing to sacrifice their lives for the cause. 
There is no way of combating this apart from pro-actve intellegence (rather than passive) which led to the tragic death of Mr Demenzes. 
What I do object to is the way this operation was carried out (from the information I am privvy to) 
I feel excessive force was used, in the circumstances (that I am aware of) but not being the operator on the ground I am not qualified to judge. 
See my previous post. 
Would I have done things differently? 
Hang on I'll dig out my rules of engagement and check....... 
Bugger, there goes half of the underground! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /frown.gif ALT=":("> 
That little bugger is nicking my.... insert as you see fit.... 
let me check my rules of engagement......... 
Hang on a min, that is an uninvited guest running away.... 
 
I think you get the idea. 
 
Soldiers are trained to fight with one hand on the trigger and one on the rules of engagement, are you!? 
 
Food for thought............... <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... s/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... ns/eek.gif ALT=":eek"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... ns/mad.gif ALT=">:"> 
And if all else fails, do as the soldier does, throw the fu**in rules of engagment at them!!! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... tongue.gif ALT=":p"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /laugh.gif ALT=":lol"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/im ... /laugh.gif ALT=":lol"> 

Edited by: <A HREF=http://p206.ezboard.com/bthetriumphdolo ... b>algtj</A> at: 18/3/06 3:11 am

Reg · #14 Post by **Reg** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:05 am

I listened to a chap the other night on the radio..his story went like this..He came in from work to find a burglar holding a 10"knife at his wife and 4year old daughter's throats,being a bit handy,he disarmed the piece of filth,and in the process broke the thief's arm. When the police arrived they arrested them both,and were BOTH sentenced..the burglar got six month's..the husband got TWO years!! He then said the reason he was jailed is because he said in court that he was "protecting his family"...you are NOT allowed to do this in the eyes of the law apparently..but,he was advised that if he had said that he was "in fear of his life",he probably would not of been sent to jail... Outrageous..and yet another reason why people are gettin sick of this country by the lack of support and feeling more and more let down by the government..no wonder there is so much road rage,i think this happens mainly because the ordinary working persons morale is on the floor at the moment with frustration.. 
Rant over..

Jon Tilson · #15 Post by **Jon Tilson** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:15 pm

Redritchie I se entirely where you are coming from.. 
 
I wasnt defending Tony Martin BTW. The programme merely did something to up my faith in the legal process which I have to say in the light of most of new labour's programme of legislation, the iraq war, response to terrorism, religious hatred bill, identity cards and the unfortunate demise of Mr Demenezes (appologies if I keep spelling his name wrong)...has taken a severe battering. 
I'm a patriot because our country allows substantial individual freedoms. Those are diminishing with no good reason. The presumption of innocent until proven guilty is under threat. The state is trying to become our master and NOT our servant. 
 
Most of us would not have behaved like Mr Martin... 
I think most of us would have shouted...Hands up or I fire ...or words to that effect. Most of us would have reported the incident to the police right away. Most of us would have an explanation as to how we came to posses a firearm we had just used in anger. 
 
As to the guy who shot Mr Demenezes....and all those other professionals who have the right to bare arms and use them under duress...You deserve our respect. 
 
But you also certainly have to give a serious account to us and your chain of command when you kill an innocent man. The chain of command is and always will be accountable to US...represented by the crown and parliament. As such the chief constable should have the integrity to take responsibility for the entire operation and resign...like Lord Carrington did when the Falklands were invaded on his watch. 
 
This chief constable clearly hasn't the integrity to do so. 
The politicans havent the guts to demand his badge. 
 
Can you see why we are so concerned? 
 
You expect this in a 3rd world country...not here... 
until now. 
 
Jonners

The Triumph Dolomite Club - EzBoard Archive

Tony Martin TV show....

Tony Martin TV show....

i didn't see

Re: i didn't see

^

Re: ^

Re: ^

Re: ^

Re: ^

Re: ^

Thread Hijack....

Castle

Re: Castle

^

^

More good points....

Who is online