My personal view is that the TV Licence fee should be scrapped. In this day and age, the BBC can no longer claim a monopoly over what is broadcasted. Therefore, it is time that the people are relieved of having to pay this TV tax. I remember back in the mid 1950s that our family were one of the first in the village to own a 14 inch black and white television set. I was too young to know and understand about the TV Licence fee. Programmes only came on for so many hours each day and ended the night playing the National Anthem. One of my lasting memories is that of Dixon of Dock Green, where the crime was committed and the criminal was brought to justice all within half an hour.
In prison I set up the Prison Law Advice Centre in my cell, and one morning a fellow inmate sought my advice in relation to a prison disciplinary offence he had been charged with, namely being in unauthorised possession of a TV in his cell. On the face of it, it first appeared that he did not have a leg to stand on. However, the more I listened to his story there emerged what appeared to be a legal loophole. I informed the inmate that the question the defence must ask the adjudicator to decide is, when is a TV not a TV? I was reminded of this case recently when I received a summons to appear before the magistrate's court for alleged non-payment of the TV Licence fee.
I had received numerous threatening letters demanding that I pay a TV Licence fee or else! I ignored the letters, so one day I received a visit from two Enforcement Officers. They asked me some questions, cautioned me, then asked me some more questions and left. The visit only lasted 5 minutes. My appearance before the magistrates lasted longer, and they decided that I was technically guilty and awarded me a absolute discharge. Had I been guilty, I could not have complained at the lenient sentence. However, I still believed that I was innocent of the charge and lodged my appeal against conviction to the Crown Court. I received notice that the appeal would be heard on 2 November 2006, at 10.30 am. Yet, on the court list beneath my case reference it stated "Respondents attendance excused". I telephoned the court to enquire whether I needed to attend, I was assured that I still needed to attend. The judge apologised for my inconvenience and waste of time, and informed me that my appeal was not contested and therefore would be allowed and he wished me well and said go and live in peace.
The inmate's computer was missing the piece of equipment which would enable it to receive live broadcasts therefore it was incapable of receiving live broadcasts and was not a reciever under the Communications Act. He was found not guilty of the charge. By the same token, my TV is used as a CCTV monitor, for viewing DVDs and pre-recorded video tapes. There is no ariel attached and the TV is not capable of receiving live broadcasts. The magistrates had been confused by the prosecution hoodwinking them, and they had misconstrued the terms receiver, possession and installation under the relevant statute. It is not for us to prove our innocence but for them to prove our guilt. I wonder how many people are unnecessarily paying the £130.50 TV Licence fee?
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
No comments:
Post a Comment