Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Huw Edwards







de la zouch

Well-known member
Jul 12, 2007
572
The BBC knew he had been arrested, but that means nothing. He might have been not guilty, and you can't sack anyone on mere allegations. They say they would have fired him if and when he had been charged, but he resigned before then.

You can't blame the BBC for keeping anything quiet. There are legal restrictions on they an and cannot report in these cases. It isn't like a social media witch hunt (compare the EDL idiots at Southport yesterday).
Not quite so black and white
 


Han Solo

Well-known member
May 25, 2024
2,932
Thank goodness not what is involved in this case but only time anything adult obscene has ever appeared on my laptop is several times when I have been looking for an Albion stream
Have you tried turning it off and on
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
56,054
Burgess Hill
Not quite so black and white
It is really. They couldn’t sack him until he’d been found guilty. The only other option would have been to ‘encourage’ his resignation - and any lawyer for him would have insisted on a pay-off at that point to avoid a claim for unfair dismissal in those circumstances - had that happened the furore would now be the same because it’s still taxpayer‘s money.
 


de la zouch

Well-known member
Jul 12, 2007
572
It is really. They couldn’t sack him until he’d been found guilty. The only other option would have been to ‘encourage’ his resignation - and any lawyer for him would have insisted on a pay-off at that point to avoid a claim for unfair dismissal in those circumstances - had that happened the furore would now be the same because it’s still taxpayer‘s money.
Fair enough, as a large organisation they probably had to err on the side of caution.
 




cunning fergus

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 18, 2009
4,905
The BBC knew he had been arrested, but that means nothing. He might have been not guilty, and you can't sack anyone on mere allegations. They say they would have fired him if and when he had been charged, but he resigned before then.

You can't blame the BBC for keeping anything quiet. There are legal restrictions on they an and cannot report in these cases. It isn't like a social media witch hunt (compare the EDL idiots at Southport yesterday).
If you were to read this thread from the start I am pretty sure there will be the usual suspects damping their mattress that poor mentally ill Huw needed to be protected from criticism and needed space to recover.

Now we know he is a degenerate sex case that if natural justice was to be served would see him chucked off the top floor of broadcasting house.

Here is the link that national treasure Huw’s case has with Southport rioting, where the very same supporters of Huw will be in the camp of the “mentally ill” regardless of how many soldiers/children/pensioners they kill.

Now Huw is convicted the truth will come out about his deparavity, maybe sniffing round the new boys like his fellow degenerate traveller Schofield.

Sadly the media can’t be trusted with truth, hence the mental illness card is played, it’s only the dunces that swallow it, like they do with lockdown, climate change and all the other shit the modern media/politicians want to shove down our throats.

Hasta la Victoria Siempere………
 
Last edited:




A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,803
Deepest, darkest Sussex
Thank god for the Sun in this case.....
Never thought I would write that.
It would appear so, although I will clarify that my original comment was related to the previous allegations from a year ago which never went anywhere and not the ones which have been in the news this week for the avoidance of any doubt.
 




Cheeky Monkey

Well-known member
Jul 17, 2003
23,963
Huw Edwards - spending your winter fuel allowance on kiddie porn and sunglasses.

No more TV license.

Aunty OUT.
Does anyone pay for that crap? The last time I had a licence Cameron was PM. With all the streaming platforms I'm surprised it's still viable.
 


Pretty Plnk Fairy

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 30, 2008
832
Thank goodness not what is involved in this case but only time anything adult obscene has ever appeared on my laptop is several times when I have been looking for an Albion stream

Does that mean you got a Palace stream instead?

Regards

DF
 






TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,323
The man who shared indecent images of children with the former BBC presenter Huw Edwards is a 25-year-old fellow Welshman who was given a 12-month suspended jail term earlier this year.

Alex Williams, from Merthyr Tydfil, was sentenced in March at Merthyr Tydfil crown court after pleading guilty to seven offences related to possessing and distributing indecent images.
 










jcdenton08

Offended Liver Sausage
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
15,023
If it wasn't for the initial investigation would any of this have come out?

Doubtful
What appears to have happened is the police arrested the offender who sent the illegal images, simply traced the phone number attached to the whatsapp account they were sent to, which belonged to Edwards. They will have then requested a search warrant on Edwards’ devices, and arrested and questioned him under caution while his devices were sent for forensics.

Once they gained enough evidence (I read there is a massive backlog of devices awaiting forensics) he was charged.

It appears to be completely unrelated to the other allegations.
 


Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,809
hassocks
What appears to have happened is the police arrested the offender who sent the illegal images, simply traced the phone number attached to the whatsapp account they were sent to, which belonged to Edwards. They will have then requested a search warrant on Edwards’ devices, and arrested and questioned him under caution while his devices were sent for forensics.

Once they gained enough evidence (I read there is a massive backlog of devices awaiting forensics) he was charged.

It appears to be completely unrelated to the other allegations.
Fair enough
 


dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
56,054
Burgess Hill
So even though the BBC knew the severity of the then alleged offenses committed they were happy to give Uncle Hughie a pay rise

Also contractual, at a time when he hadn’t been charged with anything. Happens all the time - simple employment law and contract law :shrug:
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
63,043
The Fatherland
If you were to read this thread from the start I am pretty sure there will be the usual suspects damping their mattress that poor mentally ill Huw needed to be protected from criticism and needed space to recover.

Now we know he is a degenerate sex case that if natural justice was to be served would see him chucked off the top floor of broadcasting house.

Here is the link that national treasure Huw’s case has with Southport rioting, where the very same supporters of Huw will be in the camp of the “mentally ill” regardless of how many soldiers/children/pensioners they kill.

Now Huw is convicted the truth will come out about his deparavity, maybe sniffing round the new boys like his fellow degenerate traveller Schofield.

Sadly the media can’t be trusted with truth, hence the mental illness card is played, it’s only the dunces that swallow it, like they do with lockdown, climate change and all the other shit the modern media/politicians want to shove down our throats.

Hasta la Victoria Siempere………
I had you down as a number of things…but until now never a conspiracy theory nutter.
 


mejonaNO12 aka riskit

Well-known member
Dec 4, 2003
22,023
England
So even though the BBC knew the severity of the then alleged offenses committed they were happy to give Uncle Hughie a pay rise

As far as I understand it:

The pay rise was for the year April 23 to April 24

He was suspended in July 23

That is after April 23 when the pay rise happened.

Details are annoying, aren't they.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here