Posted on 03/05/2005 12:20:13 PM PST by neverdem
The BBC yesterday defended its decision to pay convicted burglar Brendan Fearon for his side of the Tony Martin case.
Fearon is understood to have received around £4,500 from the makers of a drama documentary to give his first television interview. The BBC1 programme, to be shown later this year, will also feature Martin, and use a mix of drama and interviews with witnesses and experts to recreate the incident.
It provoked a national debate when Martin was jailed for killing intruder Fred Barras and wounding Fearon, Barras's accomplice in a bungled attempted robbery at Martin's farmhouse in Norfolk. Martin was convicted in 1999 of murder, reduced to manslaughter on appeal. Fearon was jailed for 20 months for his part in the robbery.
"The BBC guidelines are very clear that payments to convicted criminals are only justifiable when there is exceptional public interest in what a contributor has to say and where there is no other way of obtaining such a contribution," a BBC spokesman said yesterday.
"It is extremely important that the public hears the fullest possible account ... we believe that what Mr Fearon has to say is a contribution which will ensure that the programme is properly balanced and gives as full a picture as is possible."
Viewers will be told Fearon has been paid via an onscreen caption. The executive producer, Richard Klein, said that the wider issues surrounding the programme justified the payment.
"This is an iconic case at the heart of argument that has galvanised public opinion on all sides - how far can householders go in order to protect their property," he argued.
Supporters of Mr Martin point out he is not being paid.
Henry Bellingham, the Conservative MP for North West Norfolk, criticised the corporation for making the payment.
"This shows extraordinary insensitivity from the BBC," he said.
"It is certainly sailing pretty close to the BBC guidelines. It is grossly insensitive for an organisation that is meant to show complete balance."
Malcolm Starr, a friend who led the campaign to free Mr Martin, said he was surprised by the decision because Mr Martin had turned down payment for an appearance on the Tonight with Trevor McDonald programme on ITV.
"The programme makers did not want to upset the public and help Mr Martin to profit and he never asked for a penny," he said.
"I can tell you that Mr Martin will be absolutely horrified and disgusted when he hears what the BBC has done now," said Mr Starr.
Which is why we must keep Hellarry as inconsequential as possible,...PBS/NPR much $$$$$$ already
It's anyone with a set now? I spent about 1.5 years in the U.K. in '91 - '92, and it was anyone with an antenna then. I had to pay the bill twice, as my stay spanned two billing periods. Oh, well, at least I didn't get billed for Maggie's Poll Tax. Some of the people working with me did, and they had a tough time proving that they were U.S. citizens.
All kidding aside, but you're right. It's like seeing a beloved elderly relative slipping away into the depths of Alzheimer's.
Didn't he tell his story for free on the witness stand?
England,,,Double Stupid.
We had recently a farmer shooting and wounding two guys he found loading his quadbike to their ute... and of course the silly state indicted him.
I don't remember the outcome, but the Federated Farmers provided him with a lowyer and led a a huge public campaign for his exoneration.
I say, they should award them both - that is, Tony Martin and the NZ farmer - medals for bravity and contribution to the public security.
It sure does. With crime we need police, prison guards, lawyers, and judges. With more crime, we need more of the above. This is the racket that the socialists run. Remember Clinton was to put an extra 100,000 police on the streets rather than take an extra 100,000 criminals off the streets!
At some point paying protection to local gangsters will be cheaper than paying for government. The age of the warlord follows the fall of a decadent overtaxed society. It happened to Rome. It happened to the Soviet Union. It will happen here.
It's actually per household/residence/business address - though there are reduced rates for multi-occupancy premises such as nursing homes and similar. It still stinks but there is talk of phasing it out by around 2012. Mind you, that's not altrusim on the part of the BBC, they just recognise that, by then, broadband reception will be so widespread that most households will be viewing via the net. In order to capture that, they'll need new legislation and it wouldn't have a cat in hell's chance of getting through Parliament.
As to the dreaded poll tax - it's gone. That issue was so unpopular and evoked so much public dissent (indeed riots) that they had to scrap it and go back to the old city council tax. It was also the only issue in recent years in which we Brits actually got so pi**ed at our government, we came close to displaying emotion ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.