Re: I think the discussion is going off of the point
The original story stated that the youngest defendant was 16. This has since been updated to 20. However, what's telling is that the person prosecuted does not live at the address, from the gist of the story the 20 year old is actually the child minder for the owners of the property and as such should not be liable for the homeowner's lack of tv license.
It wouldn't surprise me if they did try and prosecute a child at some point.