The Interrogation of Tony Martin

It's very easy to criticise the police and the authorities in a case like this. I remember this happening and it's hard to believe it was almost 20 years ago. The public had a lot of symphathy for Tony Martin and quite rightly I feel, but every case has to be judged on the facts so I don't blame the police or the judicial system for doing what had to be done. Imagine a similar scenario if someone shot at a couple of young lads for scrumping apples for example, ok they shouldn't have done it but the public's opinion would Have been completely different so it's quite right that each case should be investigated,but it's terrible that things have to come to this of course.

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

In August 1999, Norfolk farmer Tony Martin (played here by Steve Pemberton) was arrested and interviewed under caution, after a teenage burglar was shot dead at his home, Bleak House, an isolated, remote farmhouse, which had been the subject of numourous other break ins over a long period of time. DC Peters (Daniel Mays) and DS Newton (Stuart Graham) are left to contend with this curious, eccentric individual in the interrogation room, a man who behaves and reacts in a way they are unable to comprehend.

It's hard to believe it's been nearly twenty years since the Tony Martin saga first unfolded, and the nationwide uproar it inspired, calling into question the rights of homeowners to defend their property. I, for one, still regard the whole thing as one of the greatest travesties of justice this country has ever known, and another disturbing, enraging example of the establishment making a pariah of 'the local weirdo', someone they're too ignorant and uninformed to try and bother to understand, and hang out to dry in a disgusting attempt to boost their arrest and conviction rate (Christopher Jeffries being another prime example!), something I feel I've been a victim of in some way or another over the years.

This one off TV drama from director David Nath focuses on Martin's interrogation following his arrest, and so in itself makes for a kind of cynical, voyeuristic experiment, being that the primary focus of our attention is meant to be on how odd and unconventional this man ('freak') is (or else why not anyone else's interrogation???) While it's convincing in it's word for word, verbatim recreation of the interview, in the space of just an hour (with ad breaks in between!) it can't really get under the skin of Martin any more than this, and so just plays out pretty straightforwardly.

It concludes with none other than the real life Tony Martin returning to his old home, now all boarded up, for the first time since the 'crime.' While his attitude to the dead boy is pretty cold and unsympathetic, this will be perfectly understandable to most people. I would defy anyone to have reacted differently in his situation, and the whole arrest, interrogation, conviction and incarceration of this man is a stain on this country's national character. He's well played by Pemberton for the first half, and while it's constrained to what it can do, it still makes for interesting and informative viewing. ***

The case of Mr. Martin stands as a glaring example of a miscarriage of justice, where an innocent man was wrongly convicted of murder. From the outset, the police exhibited a clear bias against Mr. Martin by dismissing his claims of self defence. Their unwavering determination to pin the crime on him tainted the entire investigation, leading to a conviction based on flimsy evidence and questionable witness testimony.

Mr. Martin's account of events was consistently dismissed out of hand, despite its logical coherence and the lack of physical evidence to contradict it. The police's tunnel vision prevented them from exploring other avenues of investigation. The prosecution's case was built on a shaky foundation of circumstantial evidence, while Mr. Martin's alibi was conveniently ignored.

Throughout the trial, the defense presented compelling evidence of Mr. Martin's innocence, but the jury was swayed by the prosecution's relentless focus on his alleged motive. The court's failure to provide adequate instructions on reasonable doubt and the weight of circumstantial evidence allowed the jury to convict based on speculation and conjecture rather than concrete proof.

The miscarriage of justice in Mr. Martin's case is a grave reminder of the dangers of bias and the importance of due process. It highlights the need for thorough investigations, unbiased juries, and a fair and impartial trial process to ensure that no innocent person is wrongfully condemned.