3 August 2010

Update: Tony Stone’s case

Tony Stone has applied for a judicial review of his conviction and sentence for non-payment of TV licence fee. He asks the High Court to quash the June 2010 decision of Surrey justices on the grounds it resulted from an unfair trial.

At the trial, Mr. Stone pleaded a conscientious objection to the TV licence fee, on the grounds of the unfairness of that system, BBC’s bias, and poor quality of its programmes. However, the Magistrates ruled they had no jurisdiction to consider these matters, and found Mr. Stone guilty.

In his application to the High Court, Mr. Stone points out he was effectively denied an opportunity to present his defence, the entire bench of Magistrates was replaced in the middle of the proceedings, and there are suspicions that the Magistrates and their Clerk discussed the case privately with the Prosecution Counsel. The Clerk interrupted Mr. Stone's witnesses Vladimir Bukovsky and Gerard Batten, and allegedly prejudiced the Magistrates' decision by giving a misleading legal advice on the scope of their jurisdiction and the substance of Mr. Stone‘s defence.

In earlier correspondence, the Magistrates Court declined to comment on Mr. Stone’s allegations, but declared it would not contest his judicial review claim.