Anthony Scrivener, QC, said that the jury at Norwich Crown Court was right to convict Mr Martin of murdering Fred Barras, 16, at his farm. He spoke out because of the dispute over the rights of homeowners to defend property.

“Tony Martin’s actions were wrong and his case exceptional,” Mr Scrivener said, “and it is wrong for politicians to play on people’s fears. Even if the suggested test of grossly disproportionate force had been used, it is likely that the jury would still have convicted.

“Martin had fired a shotgun into the back of Fred Barras as he tried to run away. Not only that, but Martin had shouted no warning but had crept downstairs to shoot. He was so close to Barras that every pellet went through the youth’s body.”

In an East Anglian newspaper Mr Scrivener wrote: “Are people really suggesting that one should be allowed to blast a fist-sized hole through someone’s back if they are on your property and appear to be up to no good? And Martin used a pump-action shotgun, a weapon banned after the 1987 Hungerford massacre but which he said he found in his car. He had not gone to the police or stayed at the scene after the killing and had hidden the gun.”

Mr Scrivener said that he understood public anger toward burglars. A former Chairman of the Bar, he described the remarks of Lord Goldsmith, QC, the Attorney-General, that we should remember the rights of criminals, as not a little fatuous. “Of course criminals have rights under the law,” he said, “but the law is quite right to favour the use of force against them in such a situation — as it already does.” Mr Martin, 57, of Emneth Hungate, was found guilty of Barras’s murder.

The charge was later reduced to manslaughter and he was released from jail last year.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• 20mph limit to cut urban road deaths
• Great grades not needed to be a good doctor
• The survivors' tales