Bitu Bhalla, appearing for Martin, argued during the two-day high court hearing that the farmer was "not a nutter" and there was no serious risk of him reoffending. His counsel argued Martin was entitled to release because statistically there was more chance of "winning the lottery" than the "simple farmer" reoffending.
However, Pushpinder Saini, counsel for the board, argued that it had not acted irrationally and burglars were entitled to protection from violent homeowners and were not to be treated as "fair game".
Guardian UK May 8 2003{England. Pushpinder.}
