Post by Teddy Bear on Jul 4, 2009 22:49:16 GMT
Just a reminder to all those who may be avoiding paying their license fees, and not willing to make a public stand like those mentioned in the article below, that if you haven't checked out your rights in this regard, then visit the anti-TVL forum TO GET EMPOWERED!
It will be interesting to see how this prosecution develops, and how much negative publicity the BBC increases for itself. Whatever, these guys like Kelly, Bukovsky, and others mentioned below are the real heroes in today's society.
It will be interesting to see how this prosecution develops, and how much negative publicity the BBC increases for itself. Whatever, these guys like Kelly, Bukovsky, and others mentioned below are the real heroes in today's society.
Licence rebel prosecuted as BBC finally tackles TV fee 'refuseniks'
By Jonathan Petre
The BBC is prosecuting a viewer who has refused on principle to pay his television licence for seven years, amid claims the Corporation is fearful of a growing backlash against the fee.
Retired engineer John Kelly was one of several thousand people who have refused to pay since 2002 in protest at what they regard as bias in the BBC's news coverage of issues such as the European Union.
He and nearly all the other 'refuseniks', including former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, have so far escaped court – despite tens of thousands of prosecutions each year.
But now he has received a summons which he believes has been prompted by a flurry of publicity about high-profile figures, including former BBC presenter Noel Edmonds and journalist Charles Moore, who are also threatening to rebel.
Mr Kelly, 70, from Exmouth, Devon, who has been ordered to appear at Exeter magistrates' court later this month, said: 'Why are they picking on me now, after all this time?
'I think the BBC wants to crackdown on some of us to discourage more people from refusing to pay.
'There is a growing groundswell of opinion against the Corporation in the wake of the Jonathan Ross scandal and other things like expenses. My summons is not a random thing.'
Mr Kelly was one of 2,000 people who signed up to a campaign launched by Mr Bukovsky, a vice-president of the Freedom Association, eight years ago.
He initially complained to the BBC governors that the Corporation's coverage of the EU was so biased that it was in breach of its Royal Charter obligations to provide balance, but was told it was a matter of 'editorial judgment'.
Since then, despite threats of legal action, he has withheld his fee but until recently had never been visited by inspectors.
Mr Kelly said: 'I have a file 2in thick. Every time they have written threatening me I have replied giving my reasons.
'Why they have picked on me now, I suspect, is because last October Charles Moore wrote in the Spectator magazine that if the BBC was still employing Jonathan Ross he would not renew his licence.
'I wrote to tell him of my experiences and he mentioned me. I was then quoted in other newspapers. Then it went a bit quiet until February, when two inspectors marched up the drive.
'They wanted to come in. I said no. They said, "Have you got a TV?" I said yes. They said, "Do you watch it." I said yes. They said, "Do you have a licence?" I said, "Have you read the file?'' They said, "No.'' I said go away and read it. That is the last I heard until I got the summons from Exeter magistrates.'
He said he faced a maximum fine of £1,000, about the same amount that he had refused to pay, but he would be applying for a trial by jury so he could argue his case that it was the BBC that was in breach of the law.
Mr Moore, the former editor of the Daily Telegraph and a Spectator columnist, has said that he will not pay his licence if Ross remains on the BBC payroll after leaving obscene messages for Andrew Sachs during a Radio 2 show.
Mr Bukovsky, 66, said he and others planned to turn up to support Mr Kelly at his hearing.
The BBC claimed that TV Licensing, which oversees the collection of the £142.50 annual licence fee, had in the past prosecuted people who refused to pay out of principle.
A spokesman for TV Licensing said yesterday: 'Anyone caught watching or recording TV programmes without a licence risks prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000.'
By Jonathan Petre
The BBC is prosecuting a viewer who has refused on principle to pay his television licence for seven years, amid claims the Corporation is fearful of a growing backlash against the fee.
Retired engineer John Kelly was one of several thousand people who have refused to pay since 2002 in protest at what they regard as bias in the BBC's news coverage of issues such as the European Union.
He and nearly all the other 'refuseniks', including former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, have so far escaped court – despite tens of thousands of prosecutions each year.
But now he has received a summons which he believes has been prompted by a flurry of publicity about high-profile figures, including former BBC presenter Noel Edmonds and journalist Charles Moore, who are also threatening to rebel.
Mr Kelly, 70, from Exmouth, Devon, who has been ordered to appear at Exeter magistrates' court later this month, said: 'Why are they picking on me now, after all this time?
'I think the BBC wants to crackdown on some of us to discourage more people from refusing to pay.
'There is a growing groundswell of opinion against the Corporation in the wake of the Jonathan Ross scandal and other things like expenses. My summons is not a random thing.'
Mr Kelly was one of 2,000 people who signed up to a campaign launched by Mr Bukovsky, a vice-president of the Freedom Association, eight years ago.
He initially complained to the BBC governors that the Corporation's coverage of the EU was so biased that it was in breach of its Royal Charter obligations to provide balance, but was told it was a matter of 'editorial judgment'.
Since then, despite threats of legal action, he has withheld his fee but until recently had never been visited by inspectors.
Mr Kelly said: 'I have a file 2in thick. Every time they have written threatening me I have replied giving my reasons.
'Why they have picked on me now, I suspect, is because last October Charles Moore wrote in the Spectator magazine that if the BBC was still employing Jonathan Ross he would not renew his licence.
'I wrote to tell him of my experiences and he mentioned me. I was then quoted in other newspapers. Then it went a bit quiet until February, when two inspectors marched up the drive.
'They wanted to come in. I said no. They said, "Have you got a TV?" I said yes. They said, "Do you watch it." I said yes. They said, "Do you have a licence?" I said, "Have you read the file?'' They said, "No.'' I said go away and read it. That is the last I heard until I got the summons from Exeter magistrates.'
He said he faced a maximum fine of £1,000, about the same amount that he had refused to pay, but he would be applying for a trial by jury so he could argue his case that it was the BBC that was in breach of the law.
Mr Moore, the former editor of the Daily Telegraph and a Spectator columnist, has said that he will not pay his licence if Ross remains on the BBC payroll after leaving obscene messages for Andrew Sachs during a Radio 2 show.
Mr Bukovsky, 66, said he and others planned to turn up to support Mr Kelly at his hearing.
The BBC claimed that TV Licensing, which oversees the collection of the £142.50 annual licence fee, had in the past prosecuted people who refused to pay out of principle.
A spokesman for TV Licensing said yesterday: 'Anyone caught watching or recording TV programmes without a licence risks prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000.'