The Huw Edwards situation

[Dis86]

We do end up in a weird situation with our varying age of consent/adulthood rules.

It's being reported the girl was 17 (when payments started anyway) and if that's the case and nothing happened earlier then we are in a position that they could have probably legally had sex with the person, but having a naked picture of them is child pornography.

Which is truly truly bizarre, isn't it? I can put my penis in this girl but I can't take a photo of me not putting my penis in her (by consent).

What I've just noticed is there's nothing to say any of this, at least at first, was pornographic.

 

[Resident]

Is there a reason this individual has still not been named yet. Quite the witchunt on social media at the moment. A lot of bbc presenters having to come out and say it's 'not me'.

And how long before we find out that it's one of those that's denied it.

I'm surprised it's taken this long. Catherine Ryan has been spouting for a few months that there's a well known celeb who's a predator because "another celeb told her" although if I'm honest I think she was only saying it to try and make herself relevant again

 

[Participant]

It’s not being reporting anywhere that it’s a girl, plus a quote in the daily mail saying “get your bits out” would suggest otherwise.

It looks like I've misinterpreted some pronouns in the article; I can't find any evidence that it was a girl either.

Andi's back in the frame folks.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Nonce is allowed on this forum (as in the word, not FnG Magnolia) is the point.

Pardon?

 

[robfosters]

Which is truly truly bizarre, isn't it? I can put my penis in this girl but I can't take a photo of me not putting my penis in her (by consent).

What I've just noticed is there's nothing to say any of this, at least at first, was pornographic.

Strong stuff for a Sunday morning. Get yourself off to church.

 

[UTT]

Takes the heat away from Osbornes nuptials conveniently

 

[Participant]

I can put my penis in this girl

Please can we stay at least vaguely within the realms of reality in this thread

 

[VincentHanna]

This is not a comment in the BBC presenter as such (who appears to have been quite dodgy if the story is true)

But I find it ironic that The Sun is breaking this moral outrage story about a very young lady being paid to titalate a man.

They spent 30 years doing that. Sam Fox is the obvious one, but Google 'Maria Whittaker' - they put her on page 3 aged 16 as well.

And they often posted topless pictures of models, alongside a picture of how that model looked at school!

And the UK public used to pay money for this, it was the best selling paper...

 

[Dis86]

Please can we stay at least vaguely within the realms of reality in this thread

Careful, mercenary will be here to defend my honour in a minute!

 

[RxR]

Careful, mercenary will be here to defend my honour in a minute!

Maybe, but it's a family friendly forum.

 

[GreatAuk]

Seems odd the BBC won't even say whether the presenter has been suspended or not... they've had months now to investigate and come up with a plan on what they're going to say when it went public, and yet here we are with individual presenters feeling the need to deny it's them after being questioned on social media.

Personally not sure how concerned to be by the allegations - a lot depends on context. Eg if the presenter was a similar age, and it wasn't a case of them being the 17 year old's boss or whatever then I don't think I'd have much of a problem with it. Even if the pics might have been illegal for the first year of this three year period I don't see that as such a big deal when they could literally have had sex completely legally.

If the presenter was decades older that would give it a bit more of an 'ick' factor for me, and would be more concerned if the presenter told them they'd be able to get them a job at the BBC or something like that.

 

[Dis86]

Seems odd the BBC won't even say whether the presenter has been suspended or not... they've had months now to investigate and come up with a plan on what they're going to say when it went public, and yet here we are with individual presenters feeling the need to deny it's them after being questioned on social media.

Personally not sure how concerned to be by the allegations - a lot depends on context. Eg if the presenter was a similar age, and it wasn't a case of them being the 17 year old's boss or whatever then I don't think I'd have much of a problem with it. Even if the pics might have been illegal for the first year of this three year period I don't see that as such a big deal when they could literally have had sex completely legally.

If the presenter was decades older that would give it a bit more of an 'ick' factor for me, and would be more concerned if the presenter told them they'd be able to get them a job at the BBC or something like that.

I think they've said the presenter isn't suspended but also isn't currently on air.

 

[C Kent]

I think they've said the presenter isn't suspended but also isn't currently on air.

Indeed and not naming the individual is the right call as it's just an allegation currently, unfortunately it will just spur a social media frenzy.

 

[GreatAuk]

I think they've said the presenter isn't suspended but also isn't currently on air.

I think the article I read was this one:

BBC presenter faces new allegations over explicit photos

The presenter was pictured in his underwear "ready for my child to perform for him", their mother told the Sun.

www.bbc.co.uk

Which said:
"The presenter is not due to be on air in the near future, but BBC News has not been told whether or not there has been a formal suspension."
Which leaves it a bit ambiguous.

E: although can see The Sun says he hasn't been suspended

 

[MadMossy]

I can put my penis in this girl

Make sure to use inclusive language wouldn't want to offend anyone.

It should read.

"I can put my meat sausage in this persons bonus hole" according to some.

 

[robfosters]

This is not a comment in the BBC presenter as such (who appears to have been quite dodgy if the story is true)

But I find it ironic that The Sun is breaking this moral outrage story about a very young lady being paid to titalate a man.

They spent 30 years doing that. Sam Fox is the obvious one, but Google 'Maria Whittaker' - they put her on page 3 aged 16 as well.

And they often posted topless pictures of models, alongside a picture of how that model looked at school!

And the UK public used to pay money for this, it was the best selling paper...

I’m glad they stopped that. Not for a moral reason, but it could be uncomfortable sitting on the train between smart, straight laced women and then opening your paper to unveil a huge set of thrupenny bits to em.

 

[C Kent]

Make sure to use inclusive language wouldn't want to offend anyone.

It should read.

"I can put my meat sausage in this persons bonus hole" according to some.

I think bonus hole is currently my favourite term from the 'unhinged left'

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Hopefully the Mail will get onboard with this and egg on the mentalists who caused the last social media fiasco (which then spread here lol, never forget) so that we can expect innocent people's names in lights while 'saviours' fix the 'problems' which the BBC 'WILL NOT' fix themselves.

 

[thenewoc]

Culprit bingo appears to have eliminated the best options, GL, JV & RC.

It won't be long before it's publicly known with the speculation being:

* 6 figure salary
* TV & radio well known presenter
* Male
* Not currently scheduled to be on air

 

[the shadow]

Assuming the gist of this story is true, it begs the question of "what level of idiot do you have to be to do this and expect to get away with it". Any high profile presenter or celeb has a target painted on their back.

Privilege even the Judge will give some a pass