The Huw Edwards situation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jokester said:
It’s all very odd, does look like the mother is wanting cash out of this rather than justice. The son seemingly has been able to engage a high profile solicitor from a mutinational law firm, seems to be doing alright for a crack cocaine addict.
Click to expand...
I mean if you're getting £30k+ for some racey photos would you really want that cash cow to dry up ?
 
There’s a hilarious clip of Paddy McGuinness talking about this situation, but unless I want to go back to OCUK prison I really can’t post it here.
It’s worth searching it out on Twitter though.
 
BowdonUK said:
I think we know this is going to be a cover up. Whether there as been a crime or not what as happened is disgusting. We know who it is because of the picture been posted. I suspect that photo came from the parents as they reportedly have taken photos of other material on the phone that they could release.

The guy should be sacked at the very least for bringing the company in to disrepute. But we know he'll get the softest treatment as the old boys network is in play.

Anyone not as high up would have been booted long ago.
Click to expand...
Playing Devil's Advocate for a minute... if we assume no crime has been committed and if we assume everything was between consenting adults (both assumptions are obviously open for debate and further evidence), then why would he be bringing the company into disrepute? It seems that neither he, nor the "victim" leaked the photos.

Maybe anyone who has ever had a picture taken of them in a pair of pants should be sacked.

I am very much of the opinion that anyone involved in anything sexual relating to someone underage should be burned at the stake. But I am equally of the opinion that someone is innocent until proven guilty and that consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they like as long as it is within the law and does not affect other people.

Completely agree with you if a law has been broken though.
 
dowie said:
I guess; adult person who is famous pays another adult person for consensually taken pics isn't really anyone else's business. Though if it becomes publicly known (other than by rumours/insinuations) then it's perhaps not necessarily a good look for a BBC presenter (especially if the other adult was a teenage adult when this started and spending it on drugs
Click to expand...

Agree with this. This is my first post in here, and i can tell you, not one person i know, knows who the star is and almost definitely won't now.

If they come out and deny it, then they will know. 1 week from today the story will be gone
 
JonRGV250 said:
Click to expand...

Yup the BBC mentioned that about an hour ago as well.

And it's pretty much what I expected, any internal investigation by any organisations HR is going to take a distant second to a police investigation.

What is interesting though is apparently the BBC tried twice to contact the people that made the complaint and didn't get a reply, the first was via the email they provided a few days after the complaint, and then again by phone a few weeks later.
The phone attempt may be a bit late, but probably classed as within a "reasonable" time frame for a second/third attempt especially if it was being dealt with by say HR rather than the generic complaints team*, and they were allowing time for the compliainent to see the email.


*Who get a flood of complaints about everything from a nipple at 9:30pm to too much sports, to presenters with disabilities being seen by kids.
 
Last edited:
Minusorange said:
That's quite the comical slip up there given the name that was trending with the picture the other day
Click to expand...
commonly known as a Freudian slip - twitter should demand English qualifications.

wonder if they could bleep the parliamentary broadcast if, as suggested, an MP gives name in parliament.
 
Hades said:
Playing Devil's Advocate for a minute... if we assume no crime has been committed and if we assume everything was between consenting adults (both assumptions are obviously open for debate and further evidence), then why would he be bringing the company into disrepute? It seems that neither he, nor the "victim" leaked the photos.

Maybe anyone who has ever had a picture taken of them in a pair of pants should be sacked.

I am very much of the opinion that anyone involved in anything sexual relating to someone underage should be burned at the stake. But I am equally of the opinion that someone is innocent until proven guilty and that consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they like as long as it is within the law and does not affect other people.

Completely agree with you if a law has been broken though.
Click to expand...
I think bringing the company in to disrepute means bringing negativity to a company.

When an employee's actions override the image of a company in a negative way they are open to being sacked.

How can this presenter be taken seriously now most people know who they are? They have become a laughing stock. Anything they are involved in for the bbc will be taken over by opinions of this presenter.

If it turns out s/he as done nothing illegal then if I was the lawyer I would be saying they need to get in front of the story and become public.

In the older days this person would have resigned immediately. The person isn't doing their own cause and mental health any good dragging it out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom