This time of the year is generally a period when more T.V. is watched by more viewers than at any other time. It has been an unusually many months since I last was allocated to sit on a T.V. Licensing court where alleged non license holders are prosecuted. But for a long time along with many colleagues I have been convinced that TV Licensing should be a civil matter. However all said and done T.V. licensing per se, a topic in the past, has evoked more comments than most other contentious issues. Shortly after this 2010 post a Freedom of Information request was made to and refused by the BBC. Perhaps a colleague can assist with some useful information.
-
- http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk
- 30. Dec. 2012. @ 15:09:18
Shame there's not a bit more meat to this post. Perhaps you can comment, discreetly, on the following cases:
1. Essex man's conviction overturned after TV Licensing's evidence was discredited in appeal hearing (Google "Michael Shakespeare" for more info, or see this article on our blog: http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/tv-licensings-vexatious-pursuit-of.html ).
2. Kent man, summoned on the basis of questionable SW deposition evidence, found not guilty of TV licence evasion (Google "Steve Heather" for more info, or see this article on our blog: http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/tv-licensing-humiliated-in-court_10.html )
The evidence would seem to suggest that not all TV Licensing cases are what they seem.-
- 30. Dec. 2012. @ 15:27:27
Thanks for the comment Peter. If you search this blog site "TV Licensing" you will find many previous posts and comments. All I can add is that anybody disturbed by a summons from TV Licensing aka Capita plc should appear at court and present his/her defence. The pity is that many defendants just hope it will go away:- it won`t. Be prepared and speak up! A fair hearing is assured.
-
- 30. Dec. 2012. @ 23:35:38
The BBC are above he law in the UK. They commit perjury in my opinion to get Search Warrants as no genuine information can be used to get one other than "We think" or "Our detector vans" which we are told by the BBC has never been used in a British Court, I doubt its even legal.
One of the members of tvlicenceresistance.info had a search warrant issued on him and they found nothing. He tried to find out what the so called evidence was and they claimed it was a detector, he checked the dates and found he was 200 miles away at the time so the house was empty, they committed perjury!
It's also alarming that the BBC and its PR companies can try and influence Magistrates with these courses and magazines.
On this video another person has a warrant issued on him and the Police Sargent refers to the BBC TV Licence guy as his colleague! -
- 31. Dec. 2012. @ 02:40:43
It cannot be just/fair that members of the judiciary (at any level) can be trained/briefed by a (potential) litigant.
That such 'training' can be 'secret' even in the light of a FOI request is scandalous.
This is improper......and has been since Magna Carta (-ish...yes, I know but somebody has to say it)
British justice....the envy, in 2012, of nowhere (even) vaugely civilised. The best that money can buy? -
- 05. Jan. 2013. @ 18:43:50
Why isn't the BBC tried for perjury, this is happening more and more. What kind of Magistrate just rolls over for anything the BBC tells them?
http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/index.php/topic,6676.0.html -
- 05. Jan. 2013. @ 18:46:19
Wrong link given, this is the correct one
http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/index.php/topic,6699.0.html -
- 10. Feb. 2013. @ 10:48:43
Could a defendant, someone who is being charged with watching TV without a licence, successfully insist on seeing whatever information TV Licensing had previously sent to the magistrate?
After all, it could influence the Court's decision (preumably why TV Licensing send it in the first place) and it would clearly be in the defendant's interests to know what it is, and potentially to challenge it.
Best regards,
Colin

Leave a comment
Hide subcomments