BBC - Criminal Conspiracy?
If BBC staff knowingly deceived viewers into believing that they could win a prize by calling a premium rate phone number when they knew they could not, isn't that a conspiracy to defraud?
What do m'learned friends think?
What do m'learned friends think?
80 comments:
Hmm, pecuniary advantage? - What was the value of the prizes that went to BBC staff and their mates?
BBC News tonight heavily edited to show Gordon Queen of Snots not so hesitant as in real time this morning at PMQ. But what did you expect from this parody of Der Reichminister's Enlightenment Dept.(It might have been filmed in the Kroll Opera House)
Save the fees. It is!
I thought they were all fixed. People will still ring up and try to win these prizes. Guillable sods.
Next time some pompous, sanctimonious BBC knowitall/twit starts getting sarky with a politician - of any Party - I so hope s/he get socked in the mouth with a ripe reference to the utter dishonesty of BBC staff across the board.
And please, God, let it be Caroline Quinn first!
Wouldn't even think you needs the words "conspiracy to"...
the bbc is a totally corrupt and biased organisation that has protected a disgraceful government for years. what a shock to see some beardy on tv defending the small number of incidents of "breakdown in trust" and saying that it wont happen again.
we dont care about muppet gameshows you lentil eating brown nosing fuckwit we want all your political, eco-babble and pro-immigration shite programmes off air. you are rumbled and nobody in their right mind will ever pay their tv licence again.
thompson, fuck off you clown!
No stomach for a fight out there?
call 07092840531 with your opinions.
Where are all you BEEB supporters now?
Had all this malarki with the BB Nicki saga.
By the way, before rushing to follow a Guido legal tip, could we hear comments on the rumours now circulating that no charges will be brought in cash for honours ...
Yes, but no-one will be prosecuted.
Yes, Yates will get his "K" and everyone's happy. Off Topic, but why do I keep thinking about Dr. Kelly and that shit Cambell. Can't get it out of mt mind.
They make Dr Who and Torchwood, give the old BBC a break, we all made mistakes, lets move on!!
Dr Who has been turned into a crappy touchy-feely right-on chav fest - why should we give them a break?
If this was a backwoods station up in the Appacliachans (yes I know this is wrongly spelt) no problem, but the BBC is perseved as THE most trusted broadcaster in the world. That has now been destroyed by the grasping actions of a few people.
Re cash for honours:
If no charges are brought, Blair and his cronies will celebrate.
Brown won't join them; he'll have to face the backlash from the vast majority of people who will see it as yet another whitewash.
I would question 'THE most trusted broadcaster in the world'. I don't think many people, especially in North America, would regard the BBC as anything more than a state-controlled organ. I would hazard that this news just confirms the suspicions that many people hold about such an organisation anyway.
bebopper
admire your optimism, but it won't happen - NULAB will turn the other cheek and carry on, because that's the way they are - SHITS
Julian, you would be suprised that many Right Wing websites in the US tell people that they should listen to the BBC rather than US stations as they think they are being fed propaganda. Whay a laugh!! I am not right wing _ I am somewhat to the left of Attila the Hun.
livingnext2romanians... NULAB will turn the other cheek. How many fucking cheeks do you think they've got.
I know they have a cheek!!!
Can you win a baby in any of these contests ?
Stick with me Kid, You will do Alright
The BBC is now clearly morally bankrupt as an institution.
Let it be cut free to a small core- World Service, News 24, Radios 3, 4 and 5- which can be rebadged Third, Home and Live respectively.
The rest can be shut down [local radio] or sold off- to News Corporation, TalkSport, UTV, Associated Newspapers, Irish Press, and other bodies that will provide a more fair and balanced service.
And the core that remains? Let it apply for grant-in-aid funding from Parliament each year; and reflect the views of Parliament in so doing.
Oh- and I am a socialist. Before you ask.
I'd say it'd be a difficult fraud case. Defo against ICSTIS codes of practice though.
Seriously though, has anyone here ever worked for an honest organisation? My first job at 18 involved going into the aftermath of posh wedding receptions and tipping the undrunk sherry back into the bottles for the next one.
Every single job I've had since, public or private sector has invoilved a fair degree of dodginess.
Before this, AlBeeb we listen to you complaints but we know better.
Now, ALBeeb we listen to you complaints but we know better.
Change what change,it won't happen.
Steven, I could tell you that last week I had $200,000,000 of Swiss bank bearer bonds through my greasy paws, but you wouldn't believe me, would you? You do not know what is around the corner in this life, that's what makes it so wonderful.
Sleeping in my armchair the other night I dreamed I saw Lord Neil, the Maquis de Wapping, naked save for a string vest, flogging the buttocks of a recumbent Dame Portillo. "Lay on, Sir" cried Michaela, doing that wet pout which he affects so seductively, although, thankfully, not eating his dinner and talking at the same time as he has been known to do,(although, God knows, eating one's dinner on TV is preferable to eating one's snot. ) "I am a Spanish Tory grandee and we can stand a good flogging." Watching from a corner sat a large shiny spider, waving its legs in front of it theatrically and repeating "I am the first black female tarantula in the house of commons, give me license-payers' money," before bursting into arachno-song: "Give me money, that's what I want, that's what I want, that's, what I want, that's want I wa-a-a-a-a-ant, yeah, that's want I want. That's-what-I-Want"
Shuddering into wakefulness I was horrified to see a similar nightmare scene being enacted on my television screen. I think the BBC has a great deal to answer for.
I wonder if other viewers have been similarly startled by the Corporation's late-night output and if anybody has any photographs of Kirsty Wark's tits.
Criminal Responsibilty in an organisation is so hard to prove.
I've been trying to prove my wife is a crook for years
These romanian neighbours, do they have lots of kids or do they, like the prime minister, suffer from aged and decrepit sperm. I know it's harsh but it's time somebody said it. One down, one damaged, what on earth was he thinking about, fathering children at his age. Does he think we are all fucking stupid or something ? I live in Scotland and I know they're all nutters but, fuck me, Brown is stone mad. Och, Ah'm in ma fufties, Ah think Ah'll have some wee bairns, the noo, d'ye ken? S'aboot the right time. Prudent tae be in your eighties when the weans is getting wed an' all. Dunno what's worse: the thought that he believes this shit, or that he doesn't, but expects us to. Man's a fucking raving lunatic. Somebody should section him. And cut his bollocks off.
If someone contacts the police and makes a complaint, an investigation under the fraud act would be started which should at least lead to the arrest and interview of those involved in duping the public
It's called obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception, isn't it ?
If there was no prize, the gullible callers would not have have made the call.
A caller should make a complaint to the police, just think of the fun.
Someone MUST have known there was no prize, and that the BEEB would make money from this. That person was dishonest in permitting this to take place. All those who joined in are also guilty if they knew the same.
Conspiracy to defraud is a great charge, and could well be appropriate, but where you have clear evidence of a substantive offence (obtaining by deception) the CPS should go for that one and join all those involved.
Well spotted Guido.
I've never been in with the idea that the BBC are conspiring against certain political parties, but this one seems a bit of a no brainer. Its not a mistake, it was a deliberate action. If Joe Public did it he would be in the cells as we speak.
Doctor Who is produced by a Shirt Lifter..That's why it has become Touchy Feely Luvvy Duvvy Chav crap.
Come to think of it, most of the BBC's output is produced by Shirt Lifters.
You don't need to allege a conspiracy. I think the individuals concerned can be charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage for another, (viz. the BBC) by deception. You might even be able to prosecute the BBC itself. I think a corporation can commit fraud.
Sorry this is a little vague. I don't have my textbooks to hand.
It's all going to be subsumed under the new offence of fraud soon, but these shenanigans will have to be dealt with under the law then in force.
From now on the assertion that "The BBC is strictly impartial" will invite the repost, "No you're not, you're a bunch of crooks."
Mr justice cocklecarrot 9.08
But the BBC will argue they were being impartial as they ripped off callers regardless of their colour, creed, background etc. So does that make it alright then?
" think the individuals concerned can be charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage for another, (viz. the BBC) "
And what pecuniary advantage did the BBC gain? Nil.
Absolute bollocks..(as usual)
Home Sec confesses to smoking canabis, lead story on BBC - coincidence, smokescreen?
How many of al BBeeb's staff would test negative for substance misuse?
Never mind that Guido. There is a by-election going to rack and ruin just down the road. Is Grant Schweppes up to his tricks again. Police should start by investigating this rather than teller-gate. In short Lit supporting Sikh hotheads (or impersonators) have proclaimed one of the candidates dead by suicide to drive votes for Lit and/or suggest the by-election will be cancelled.
Anon 12:12
There is allegedly a contingency plan in force for what happens when the BBC is split up, or if a government decides to cut the licence fee to them. The flagship is still the World Service, much of which is funded out of British Council, Foreign Office and various security services coffers - so that would be 'safe'.
The various TV channels make so much money anyway nowadays that all they would need would be a drastic pruning of staff numbers (and we’re talking thousands of staff) and better facility management than they have now. Chuck in advertising and proper management of the incredible BBC archives and there’s no reason why BBC 1 to 7 could not become a viable commercial entity.
Then we have the radio side … oh dear. As an example, BBC Radio 1 has a playlist meeting every Wednesday afternoon, attended by over 20 staff plus the music team of about 5 staff. They ponder various tracks and decide which ones will be placed on the playlist by voting for them – a process that takes some hours. In prespective the same process at EMAP (Kiss FM) and Gcap (Capital Group) is decided by just one person. To even consider commercialising the various BBC radio stations would involve massive redundancies, relocation of offices and constant reappraisal of the DJ’s and their producers, assistant producers, managers, broadcast assistants, engineers, assistant engineers and so on and so forth.
Selling off the BBC assets would be a very good start though. The BBC enjoys a property portfolio in the UK that would make any developer green with envy. From swathes of North Kensington to the enormous White City developments, large parts of Great Portland Street (whole buildings left empty or untenanted) and the Strand ; not forgetting the overseas BBC offices and transmitter stations. Add to this BBC Resources - the department that manages and provides BBC facilities for hire, such as the North Acton bluescreen and greenscreen studios, the BBC sound studios in St John’s Wood (soon to close) and the BBC’s actor and extra registers. Their property portfolio would easily cover the redundancy programme, the pensions reallocation, the costs of ‘downsizing’ and leave more than enough in the kitty for fallback reserves.
Of course it would never happen since we are talking about disbanding a government department (TV Licensing Authority) which has never happened before in this country.
Julian 1149pm: 'THE most trusted broadcaster in the world' - akin to a paedo boasting of his liking only the oldest kiddies.
It's relative morality, innit, guv,
PS isn't a government department immune from prosecution?
Today's telephone quiz:
Is the BBC:
A) A stick of salami
B) A giant flying pig
C) A corrupt organisation that funds itself by running highly dubious illegal lotteries disguised as quizzes despuite getting £3bn from the teletax?
Answers in a stamped envelope with £10 in cash (used unmarked notes only please)
what a f***ing laugh ! The British Biased Corporation caught lying and cheating yet again .
Let's campaign for the privatisation of this overblown Nulab organ .
The idea of all those lefty w***ers having to apply to Rupert Murdoch for a job is just too funny!!!!
Surely Labour should declare the Today programme in its election expenses.
I have it on good authority that Greg Dyke sank two bottles of Chateau Latiffe '61 last night.
Wouldn't it be good if Children in Need (Aaaah...it's for the kids , innit?) collapsed because no 'celebrity' wanted to be associated with it?
Anyway , they'd still have overpaid BBC puppets (or should that be muppetts?) like Woss ,Wogan and Bruce to use emotional blackmail to fund their favourite lefty causes
Freedom of Information request
How many friday caption competiton prizes has Guido awarded and how many Friday caption competition has Guido run?
Anonymous 10:35 AM
"I have it on good authority that Greg Dyke sank two bottles of Chateau Latiffe '61 last night."
Are you sure it was Greg Dyke? I'd have thought Greg would be rather more wary of the sommelier's recommendations and have taken a much closer look at the label.
Anyway, if he did he'll be seriously unwell today. Those Chinese wines are full of anti-freeze.
Julian the crown is beyond prosecution but the BBC doesnt represent the Crown(you probably know this)
As I child i was fascinated by the idea that the queen could kill any body she liked(or disliked) and nobody could touch her for it.
How much she would go up in all our estimations if she summonded Gordon Queen of Snots to Buck house and told him to leave the EU or she would tag him , one word of dissent from him she should pull a Glock out of her bag , double tap to the chest then give him a settler in the temple.
All televised to a grateful nation.
Don't go quoting Torchwood as an example of good Beeb work. If that's the sort of lefty auto-destructive weepy self-centred society we're in for, bring back the Cybermen. And they can vaporise the Teletubbies while they're at it.
Still, maybe that's just how it is in BBC Wales Land.
dead fish rot from the head down 9:40 AM
Home Sec confesses to smoking canabis, lead story on BBC - coincidence, smokescreen?
How many of al BBeeb's staff would test negative for substance misuse?
Quite a lot of them probably - look at the amount of shit they put out...
but as I stated on Radio 4, this morning, smoking cannabis is wrong, its use can cloud judgement and should be avoided by all people in positions of responsibility who must take life-and-death decisions on a daily basis.
However, in these troubled times, we must sometimes relax the rules a little - especially for those brave men and women who serve in our armed forces and are currently stationed in the war-torn regions of the Middle East...in the face of extreme and terrible dangers and under incredible levels of stress, they act as selfless missionaries of democracy and defenders of civilization...and, although I would never tolerate British soldiers smoking any form of cannabis or marijuana, I think, as human beings, we can all understand if, from time-to-time, they may feel the need to smoke the occasional Iraqi or Afghan family.
The TV licensing authority which is the BBC's goon squad has been using facist strongarm tactics to make people pay it's tax for years!
My mum (in her 70s) threw out her TV a couple of years ago in disgust at what the BBC has degenerated into (a leftist pravda) and they have been sending her many threatening letters and coming round her flat demanding to see inside to make sure she does not have a TV! They have stood outside her window with devices and even got caught putting a medical stethoscope to her front door to listen for the sound of a TV! They have jailed many nonpayers and sent in the ballifs to steal goods from people who owe them money! They bully and threaten even those who do not own a TV and they think this is a proper way to behave BUT now they have been caught with their fingers in the till I bet not one will be fired or prosecuted!
English democrat - I haven't owned a TV for years and I still get threatening letters about once a fortnight from the TVLA. I refuse to answer the door to them, refuse to reply to their letters and refuse to tell them my name. My objective is not merely to save the cost of a licence but to nutralise someone else's by making the bastards waste their time and postage. I invite other democrats to follow suit.
The BBC has paid for Glasto tickets for 5 MPs.
Read more here
One has to wonder - what does the BBC expect in return for such "hospitality"?
It is morally indefensible for the Government to continue to levee the Licence Fee as they have done for decades. This is a de facto annual tax disguised as a payment-for-services scheme. Repugnant.
An an organisation, the BBC generates a vast amount of revenue and can stand on its own two feet - perhaps even with government grants - but those grants should come from general taxation.
There is no service that the BBC provides that a commercial provider does not.
There are pieces of the BBC Empire that I think generate invaluable content and which are not really that commercially oriented - News24 for a basic national news service, Radio 4 for intelligent talk and music programmes, the World Service for absolutely brilliant and insightful news coverage of the wider world.
The rest of the organisation merely strangles private enterprise. Dispose of it and jettison the licence fee.
Frankly, I would suggest we look at the superb quality and diversity of the programming on the American National Public Radio / Public Radio International stations and move to a listener-supported model.
Wouldn't people make a tax-deductible donation of £40 to keep BBC "Core Services" running? Or are we afraid to simply recognise that commercial broadcasters do some things brilliantly and for other things in the public interest a public/private partnership is preferable?
Oh that's right - we don't trust government and this Government certainly doesn't trust us.
Well next time you get threatening letters from the TV licensing gestapo (or more accurately the NuLabour Quisling Capita) write back (after they have sent several threats) and quote:
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 which makes it an offence to send a letter or other article which conveys an indecent or grossly offensive message or a threat, or which contains information known to be false and the purpose of the letter is to cause distress or anxiety.
There is a get out clause in the MCA 1998.
(2) A person is not guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a)(ii) above if he shows—
(a) that the threat was used to reinforce a demand which he believed he had reasonable grounds for making; and
(b) that he believed that the use of the threat was a proper means of reinforcing the demand.
But with multiple letters and threats to visit "AND SEE IF YOU ARE LYING" that derogates that paragraph so tell them that any further "threats" and you will bring a ocmplaint under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 it quickly shuts them up and you get a nice apology.
P.S. The MCA was amended after that so it can now cover Emails and much more...Enjoy
Some of us have been warning of the BBC for some time.
Super article on Burning Our Money, about Auntie's coverage of the Wealth Gap "the BBC- ONCE AGAIN- have to report such shoddy leftwing propagandising as fact?"
bing crosby's stunt double 12:06 PM
And they can vaporise the Teletubbies while they're at it.
One of the most deplorable comments I have ever read on any blog anywhere on the internet.
Bet you wouldn't say that in front of a small child for whom you had parental responsibility.
In fact, I am considering reporting you to the police for incitement to child cruelty.
Annon 3.06,
Thankyou so much for the advice! I have copied down your advice and a letter (with all photocopies of demands) to the relevent place and I hope it will do some good! The quisling nazis think they can bully an old lady and I guess like any bully if you stand up to them they will cave in!
Many thanks again.
could pay, won't pay 1:22pm
May the spirit be with you brother!
I once told one of the investigators that I did not have to pay the licence fee, but he was very adamant and we became involved in a "oh yes you do, oh no I don't" situation which went on for a considerable period of time. The gentleman even insisted that everyone in the country was obliged to pay a TV licence - I disagreed and refused to allow him access to my room. He eventually realized that I did not own a TV set!
anonymous 3:06pm
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 which makes it an offence to send a letter or other article which conveys an indecent or grossly offensive message or a threat, or which contains information known to be false and the purpose of the letter is to cause distress or anxiety.
I reckon demanding payment for Eastenders alone is enough to justify a prosecution under this Act. I suppose we should think ourselves lucky that Brown has not made Eastenders compulsory core-viewing for all British citizens.
The Police won't prosecute for the telephone fraud because for some mad reason ICSTIS the regulator appears to have jurisdiction. A licence to print money and defraud without serious consequence.
What the Police should and may prosecute if a complaint were to be made is this:
Inciting a minor to commit a criminal offence is surely a serious crime and one the Police would and could prosecte for.
Your idea has been picked up by an MP (Pritchard ?) who has complained to the Met - just heard him on R4 pm.
Its just like the cash for honours stuff, except this time its no honour with cash !
cultural revolution said... The gentleman even insisted that everyone in the country was obliged to pay a TV licence - I disagreed and refused to allow him access to my room.
"Access to my room",got the picture.Still living with parents and in between jobs,again.
Oh please. They were all cock ups not conspiracies, with the exception of Jo Whiley's show.
rich.
So corruption of a minor, inducing a child to commit a criminal offence is just a cock-up?
Charge the director general with deception maybe?
fnusnuank
Yes. There was a cock up and they tried to cover it up. They didn't run the competitions with the intent to commit fraud. When they cocked up, the fraudulently tried to cover it up, in a "show must go on" fashion.
There is a difference.
rich.
Except in this case the cock-up involved a figure of £300,000 if memory serves.
Then the poor licence payers get ripped again paying the £50,000 fine.
I might be more forgiving if it came out of the producer's, director's and presenters' pockets.
Fat chance.
In 5 years, the analogue signal gets turned off, that means that every household will have the potential for recieving encrypted channels, therefore, non-payment should mean no BBC TV, simple!
So instead of, the TV licensing authority, spending money on harassing people, they should divert the money into developing an encryption system in preperation for the digital switch-over in 2012. They won't want to do this and it is something they fear. I think however, that it is inevitable in the longer run and I suspect the BBC know it too, as they were particular in NOT making encryption capability a standard on Freeview recievers. But the few people without that could easily and cheaply be upgraded upon setting up their BBC subscrition.
Technology is catching the BBC up. The days of the compulsory licence fee, will come to an end in the not too distant future.
Fnuasnuank is correct about ICSTIS.
This body claims to have complete authority over people who use premium lines (inter alia). They always pick on private entrepreneurs who make money out of doing this.
When I asked a client what their defence to this was, their response was (get this) 'But we are doing only what the BBC and British Telecom does'. And he was right.
ICSTIS was having a go at them over the civil side of matters. Huge fines and all that etc. Quite frightening.
However, where a criminal act appears to have been committed, the police and the CPS should become involved.
Surely there must be some junior/young lawyer out there with the interest to look all this up ?
(I used to do this in my younger days until I became confined to my wheelchair and adopted an American accent).
anonymous 12:27 AM, July 19
Oh hell! A life-time's theories carefully constructed from painstaking psycho-analysis has been confounded by one dream! It's completely unfathomable! Who is this strange person? Whatever is the meaning? I resign my position with immediate effect in order to take early retirement!
*weeps*
Can anyone refer me to a good psychiatrist?!
That letter in full:
Front of Envelope Top Left: NOTICE OF IMPENDING ACTION
F.A.O. Stop sending stupid letters department.
C/O Capital - New Labour Supporters Club
TV Licensing, Bristol
- - - - CONTENT - - -
1Oth **** 2007
Ref: **********
NOTICE OF LEGAL ACTION
Please be advised I am in receipt of your letter of **** 2007, after perusing the contents and taking into account the manner in which it is presented and bearing in mind previous correspondence from yourselves I contend that the letter in question is possibly in breach of the Malicious Communications Act 1998 as amended by Section 43 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.
The substantial amount of previous correspondence indicating “visits to the property” would I suggest abrogate Section 43 Part 2 “reasonable grounds” and subsequently given the gradual “threats” I would suggest this would also constitute a breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
I also contend that the letter is materially inaccurate and deceptive in its wording and is intended to mislead individuals, as I have more important matters than corresponding with such a pernicious organisation, as you yourselves have so supremely proved, in short I do not receive Television services by any means, and given that "The Licence is a payment for permission to receive any television programme service, as defined in Section 2(4) of the Broadcasting Act 1990, and not for services provided by the BBC." (Lord McIntosh of Haringey, House of Lords, 6th April 1998) I would certainly not further line the coffers of an organisation that has proved itself on every opportunity to denounce the very nation that funds its lavish organisation.
Furthermore should you continue the vague threats I would be happy to spend many an enjoyable hour in Court in the company of BBC executives who may wish to enlighten the license payer as to why they still require such a considerable fee when from the BBC’s own accounts, joint ventures and various other spin-offs in the UK and overseas are doing very well in the private sector.
Yours sincerely,
The Occupier
Sorry - Should read Capita
anonymous 5:44 PM
Don't be silly...Work? Care in the community hostel, mate, meals made, everything paid for, a nice wedge of DLA to spend every week and free drugs...Kushti!
anonymous 12:27am July 19
Thank goodness nothing like that goes on in real life!
Why doesn't the BBC move into a more profitable area of activity. Even with the currently depressed prices, both heroin & cocaine could easily be smuggled back by reporters (all, I may add, above suspicion) & flog it on the streets? I mean, does anyone think John bloody Simpson got a cavity search?
Not obtaining a pecuniary disadvantage by deception, I don't think: that's restricted to narrow circumstances not directly involving the transfer of money or property, like getting a job or a lottery ticket by deception - it's the work you do that causes the payment of wages, not the deception per se, so in a sense you obtain the chance to earn the wages by your deception, not the wages themselves; and the lottery ticket might or might not win, so it's a chance you got, not a prize. That's a pecuniary advantage.
I've blogged that the offence here would be obtaining a money transfer by deception, under section 15A of the Theft Act 1968. Conspiracy to defraud would be a decent alternative.
Post a Comment