§ 33. Mr. Hamlingasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what grounds were 1,479 negatives seized on the premises of Jean Straker, 12 Soho Square, London, W.1; what charges were preferred against him, under what Statute; and whether, in the light of the court's decision in this case, he will now seek to amend the Obscene Publications Act.
§ Mr. TaverneSome 2,000 negatives were seized last June at these premises under a magistrate's warrant issued under 1713 the Obscene Publications Acts. Mr. Straker was subsequently charged in respect of some 700 of these negatives under Section 2 of the Obscene Publications Act, 1959, as amended by Section 1 of the 1964 Act. I have no proposals for amending the Obscene Publications Acts.
§ Mr. HamlingWhy not? Is my hon. and learned Friend not aware that, throughout the West End, obscene pictures are widely on sale, yet it is an artist who is prosecuted?
§ Mr. TaverneThe question of whether he was justifiably prosecuted is not one for me. He had an opportunity of trial by jury, which he did not accept, and he put forward a defence of public good. It was a matter for the court to decide this and is not a matter on which I could judge.