[News] Huw Edwards

[Thunder Bolt]

If that's the case, then a nailed on prison sentence. However, whenever i'm sent a whattsapp image it just auto downloads to my picture gallery and I think my phone. I don't have to take any positive action for this to happen, though at some stage I presumably ticked a box to allow that to happen.

But if someone has not taken any positive action, surely that has to be a lesser sentence?

You can change the settings in each group you are in.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

As said above, it's typically a Sex Reg requirement accompanied by a SHPO and often a suspended prison term for a first time offender on images, unless they are extreme images, in which case a custodial sentence may apply.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

You can change the settings in each group you are in.

Fine, sure and some people will know this and actively go into group settings. There's probably also some things you can do outside whattsapp on your phone or photo storage settings.

But those less phone savvy? Would they know this?

To be clear, I think the fella should face jail for not taking stronger action to prevent further images being sent after being sent blatantly illegal content. But in another example I could see someone who didn't seek this content being caught up here. For example person gets out of the blue message, deletes it immediately, blocks the sender, but the settings have saved this image and he's not aware of this. Surely there must be some safeguards in place in the law against this sort of situation.

A criminal act is just that. An act.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Fine, sure and some people will know this and actively go into group settings. There's probably also some things you can do outside whattsapp on your phone or photo storage settings.

But those less phone savvy? Would they know this?

To be clear, I think the fella should face jail for not taking stronger action to prevent further images being sent after being sent blatantly illegal content. But in another example I could see someone who didn't seek this content being caught up here. For example person gets out of the blue message, deletes it immediately, blocks the sender, but the settings have saved this image and he's not aware of this. Surely there must be some safeguards in place in the law against this sort of situation.

A criminal act is just that. An act.

I don't know, but I found out after finding my phone library was full of pictures from the inlaws so checked Whatsapp to see if I could turn off the automatic download, which I could. I'm not that savvy.

 

[happypig]

Fine, sure and some people will know this and actively go into group settings. There's probably also some things you can do outside whattsapp on your phone or photo storage settings.

But those less phone savvy? Would they know this?

To be clear, I think the fella should face jail for not taking stronger action to prevent further images being sent after being sent blatantly illegal content. But in another example I could see someone who didn't seek this content being caught up here. For example person gets out of the blue message, deletes it immediately, blocks the sender, but the settings have saved this image and he's not aware of this. Surely there must be some safeguards in place in the law against this sort of situation.

A criminal act is just that. An act.

There's a test, in law, that is referred to as "The man on the Clapham omnibus", and it refers to what would the ordinary man in the street do if in a situation.
I would think that, under that test, most people, if sent an obscene image involving children, would report it to the police as most people find such content abhorrent. If someone is relying on a defence of saying they received them unsolicited and deleted them/blocked the sender, it would be quite legitimate to ask why they didn't report it to the police.

 

[schmunk]

I don't know, but I found out after finding my phone library was full of pictures from the inlaws

The dirty bastards.

 

[Clive Walker]

So sad that the passing of one of the greatest women this country ever produced will always be tarnished now.

What would be even worse would be if it transpired that people within the corporation knew he was a wrong 'un.

Think you got the wrong clip. This was from when the queen died!

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

There's a test, in law, that is referred to as "The man on the Clapham omnibus", and it refers to what would the ordinary man in the street do if in a situation.
I would think that, under that test, most people, if sent an obscene image involving children, would report it to the police as most people find such content abhorrent. If someone is relying on a defence of saying they received them unsolicited and deleted them/blocked the sender, it would be quite legitimate to ask why they didn't report it to the police.

OK. And I think I would as well. But though I don't get sent anything even mildly risque, i'm still not sure I would want the police trawling through my phone. It requires a degree of trust in the authorities which many many people won't have.

I'd say more people than not, would take the action, delete image, block sender, move on. Surely failure to report, or omitting to do anything can't constitute a criminal act.

Look, it's fair enough this is a new or obscure law, none of us know how it works. That's OK. I'm sure the people who framed the legislation have thought all this stuff through

 

[rippleman]

As said above, it's typically a Sex Reg requirement accompanied by a SHPO and often a suspended prison term for a first time offender on images, unless they are extreme images, in which case a custodial sentence may apply.

Possession of category A image is likely to result in being given a prison sentence, and sentences typically range between 6 months and 36 months.

Sentencing for Possession of indecent images in 2023 | Need the facts?

Need to know the sentence for a Possession of indecent images offence in 2023? Our comprehensive, plain-English guide gives you answers from a qualified lawyer.

www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Category A	Starting point 1 year’s custody	Category range 26 weeks’ – 3 years’ custody
Possession of indecent photograph of child/ Indecent photographs of children – Sentencing www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk Category A are the MOST extreme images. The nonce had seven of them

 

[jcdenton08]

Possession of category A image is likely to result in being given a prison sentence, and sentences typically range between 6 months and 36 months.

Sentencing for Possession of indecent images in 2023 | Need the facts?

Need to know the sentence for a Possession of indecent images offence in 2023? Our comprehensive, plain-English guide gives you answers from a qualified lawyer.

www.stuartmillersolicitors.co.uk

Category A	Starting point 1 year’s custody	Category range 26 weeks’ – 3 years’ custody
Possession of indecent photograph of child/ Indecent photographs of children – Sentencing www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk Category A are the MOST extreme images. The nonce had seven of them

Yes, but that prison sentence is often suspended for first time offenders. It’s still a custodial sentence, they just don’t serve it unless they breach the terms of their probation or reoffend.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The dirty bastards.

Don’t be stupid, trying to be funny.

 

[rippleman]

Yes, but that prison sentence is often suspended for first time offenders. It’s still a custodial sentence, they just don’t serve it unless they breach the terms of their probation or reoffend.

You can't odds soft judges sadly. If you can possess Cat A images of children being sexually abused and the judge lets you out to walk the streets then maybe we need to look at the judiciary.

I understand the need to have suspended sentences but it should never be available to someone who harms, or aids and abets the harming of children.

 

[DJ NOBO]

With the guilty plea and no past offences, it is unlikely he will go to prison

 

[amexer]

Any offence against children surely must come with a prison sentence. Only a bloody first offence because has not been caught before.
I assume man that sent him images has been arrested although maybe he could be the whistle blower and now a prosecution witness.

 

[Napper]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmj260e54x7o

Look at this absolute wrongen arriving in his shades

"They included seven category A images, the most serious classification - two of which showed a child aged between about seven and nine "

As said at the start of this thread , the bloke is a deviant sicko

still no resident expert !

 

[Triggaaar]

If that's the case, then a nailed on prison sentence. However, whenever i'm sent a whattsapp image it just auto downloads to my picture gallery and I think my phone. I don't have to take any positive action for this to happen, though at some stage I presumably ticked a box to allow that to happen.

But if someone has not taken any positive action, surely that has to be a lesser sentence?

If I received an image like the ones described I think the first thing I'd do is call my wife, and then together call the police. Taking no action (which is not what's happened in this case anyway) is simply not good enough.

 

[worthingseagull123]

I really do feel for his family as well the victims of this awful crime.

 

[TomandJerry]

The court heard that Edwards had been involved in an online chat with an adult male on WhatsApp between December 2020 and August 2021 who sent him 377 sexual images, including 41 indecent images of children, of which seven were category A (the worst), 12 category B and 22 category C.

 

[Papak]

Not following the story in huge detail - is the sender also facing charges?

 

[DJ NOBO]

Any offence against children surely must come with a prison sentence. Only a bloody first offence because has not been caught before.
I assume man that sent him images has been arrested although maybe he could be the whistle blower and now a prosecution witness.

Nowhere near the reality (unfortunately)