Judgement reserved on Martin appeal

A judgement will be given "as soon as possible"

The Court of Appeal has reserved judgement on the appeal of a farmer jailed for life for murdering a teenage burglar who broke into his home.

Tony Martin was convicted last year after he shot and killed 16-year-old Fred Barras and wounded the teenager's accomplice Brendan Fearon at his Norfolk farm in August 1999.

Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf - sitting with Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Grigson - reserved judgement on Martin's appeal to a later date and said their decision would be given "as soon as possible".

The death of Fred Barras sparked a national debate

Earlier the court heard fresh evidence about Martin's state of mind at the time of the killing, and since his time in prison.

Martin has always maintained he acted in self defence.

Psychiatrist Dr Philip Joseph told the hearing: "There is some softening of his strong views about burglars, many of whom he has mixed with in a prison setting and many of whom have been quite friendly towards him.

"He understands they are people and not a demonised force ranged against him."

'Personality disorder'

Martin was jailed for life for killing Mr Barras and was also given a 10-year sentence for wounding Mr Fearon, by shooting him in the leg.

During the appeal Michael Wolkind, QC, who headed Martin's new legal team, argued his trial lawyers had not presented the farmer's own account of what happened, and that their "failings" had prevented him from receiving a fair trial.

The court also heard how Martin suffered from a long-standing paranoid personality disorder which meant that at the time of the killing he was suffering from abnormality of mind.

The reclusive farmer had been described as "eccentric in the extreme".

Squalor

He lived alone in near darkness and squalor at the remote farmhouse, called Bleak House, sleeping with his clothes and boots on.

He was fearful of crime but told friends he was prepared to defend his property. He had ladders rigged in trees as lookout posts, and inside stair removed as a makeshift booby trap.

The controversial guilty verdict in April 2000 provoked a huge debate about how far people can go to protect their property and themselves.

To many in the rural community, Martin represented somebody fighting back against the rising tide of crime.

But the original jury decided the farmer was not defending his property but taking the law into his own hands.