The Huw Edwards situation

[C Kent]

are the parents trying to make a quick buck?

How so?

 

[Alice In Wonderland]

Indecent? Assuming it's the picture I've seen then it's funny but hardly indecent. All you can see are a couple of hairy buttocks almost side on. I've had women in the past send me worse. Maybe I should try to find some and insist they resign.

In this persons case I think it will come down to the circumstances. If he has done anything wrong then he should be gone. If not, then he shouldn't (although I suspect his career will be over either way).

Now I've got the urge to go and find it! Lol!

 

[sx_turbo]

How so?

It's not the victim that's made the claim and he has his lawyer saying as such.

The parents want to blame someone for the way their son has turned out, I imagine the sun paid a pretty penny for the story.

The local (to the victim ) police had previously investigated it and said there was no criminal case, it's been reopened due to the furor caused by the papers.

They also didn't respond to the BBC trying to contact them, ok they only tried twice, once by email and once by phonecall but if the issue was that pressing one would think they be on it with the BBC.

Instead they ended up speaking to the news paper and no doubt got a handsome sum for the information.

We'll see what the 2nd complaint brings, as it sound more serious with threatening texts being sent (how stupid is the presenter to send threatening texts) but I presume he was being blackmailed by the 2nd victim as he was "threatening" to go to police.

 

[Hotwired]

I agree that the parents should have gone to the police first. Though if the victim was 17 then there likely would be an element of grooming going on to so as a compromise they might have agreed not to approach the police.

The BBC as made this situation bigger than it should have been by not responding to the initial complaint. They should have told the parents to contact the police.

But they did.

How we got here - in less than 200 words​

On Friday, the Sun published allegations that a BBC presenter paid a young person £35,000 for explicit photos over three years - money the person's mother said was used to fund a crack cocaine habit.
The Sun says the person's parents turned to them after their complaints to the BBC failed to lead to the presenter being spoken to or taken off air.
The BBC says it twice tried, unsuccessfully, to make contact with the complainant. It was only when the Sun story broke that the director general and executive directors were told about the case, the BBC says.
On Sunday the presenter was suspended.
A lawyer for the young person has disputed the parents’ account - to which the parents replied they stood by their allegations.
The Met is assessing the allegations but there is currently no police investigation.
On Tuesday afternoon, the BBC quoted a person in their early 20s as saying that the same BBC presenter contacted them on a dating app, pressured them to meet up, and later sent abusive and threatening messages.

This TLDR states that the parents expected the BBC to read one complaint and remove the presenter while they (the parents) failed to reply to any attempts from the BBC to find out more

Then because the BBC didn't remove the presenter based on one complaint and zero follow up the parents gave the story to the sun who spun it as hard as possible.

It also says the 20 year old man has hired a lawyer to dispute his own parents allegations which is fascinating.


What would you do if you got a complaint and your attempts to contact the person complaining received zero reply. I completely believe the BBC gets a bucket of complaints, real and false every day. If I could get someone off the air by sending one email then never backing it up...

 

[C Kent]

It's not the victim that's made the claim and he has his lawyer saying as such.

The parents want to blame someone for the way their son has turned out, I imagine the sun paid a pretty penny for the story.

The local (to the victim ) police had previously investigated it and said there was no criminal case, it's been reopened due to the furor caused by the papers.

I don't believe they investigated it, they went to the police and they said no thanks. Given policing levels it's probably the standard response ( they should have said the presenter misgendered their son, would have been all over it then )

They also didn't respond to the BBC trying to contact them, ok they only tried twice, once by email and once by phonecall but if the issue was that pressing one would think they be on it with the BBC.

Yeah, it's not the parents who look bad when news broke that the beeb sent one email and then called a non responsive number (non responsive number would be generally a dead line)

Instead they ended up speaking to the news paper and no doubt got a handsome sum for the information.

Nothing to suggest they were paid is there? Hell they are still anonymous, if they wanted to 'cash in' they would have gone public and hope other news outlets would give them some sweet sweet appearance money

We'll see what the 2nd complaint brings, as it sound more serious with threatening texts being sent (how stupid is the presenter to send threatening texts) but I presume he was being blackmailed by the 2nd victim as he was "threatening" to go to police.

Leave me alone or I'll go to the police seems the right thing to do in an instance of harassment does it not?

 

[GGizmo]

But they did.

This TLDR states that the parents expected the BBC to read one complaint and remove the presenter while they (the parents) failed to reply to any attempts from the BBC to find out more

Then because the BBC didn't remove the presenter based on one complaint and zero follow up the parents gave the story to the sun who spun it as hard as possible.

It also says the 20 year old man has hired a lawyer to dispute his own parents allegations which is fascinating.

What would you do if you got a complaint and your attempts to contact the person complaining received zero reply. I completely believe the BBC gets a bucket of complaints, real and false every day. If I could get someone off the air by sending one email then never backing it up...

What is the source you've posted from?

If someone made an accusation against one of my employees that they had been paying for sexual images of an underage person the least I'd do is go and speak to the employee. Wouldn't you?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

On the legal side if the victim was 17 then its a criminal offence.

If the victim was 18 it is still pretty bad to have one of the top front facing people being seen like that in public. TV people have been sacked for a lot less.

I think the presenter needs to get ahead of the story. I'm not heartless to his situation. But this silly guessing game going on now is probably the most stressful for all involved.

If the victim was 18 then they aren't a victim and to be honest this is then none of our damned business. What people do in their private lives if legal is their business. Oh course if they are say a politician who pushes family values and is then caught having an affair, then they are fair game and deserve exposure as a hypocrite. Just being famous doesn't mean we should get to know what they get up to in the bedroom.

 

[Peter75]

This thread moved quickly. I just want to ask a couple of quick questions!

A: Who is the presenter they're talking about?
B: Are we not allowed to say? (hopefully you **** up and not read question B and answer question A first)
C: If B applies does this thread heavily insinuate who it is? Because if it does I'll start trawling.

 

[scarps]

Ive seen a pic today of the person maybe involved, not the youngster, the older person, was sent to a workmate by someone I wouldn't think would send something like this and even where they got it from, workmate thinks they have sent it to him by mistake, trousers and pants down showing their backside in the mirror pic.
Has one like that been posted online and its a fake? I haven't really paid much attention on the subject until I saw this picture so no idea really even if they had sent pics the other way

 

[Kenai]

What is the source you've posted from?

If someone made an accusation against one of my employees that they had been paying for sexual images of an underage person the least I'd do is go and speak to the employee. Wouldn't you?

Not until I was reasonably sure the allegations had some substance to them. You'd want more than someone's say so.

 

[GGizmo]

Not until I was reasonably sure the allegations had some substance to them. You'd want more than someone's say so.

Wow, seriously?

You wouldn't even speak to them?

You're acting like its a regular thing that people get accused of it.

 

[Hotwired]

What is the source you've posted from?

If someone made an accusation against one of my employees that they had been paying for sexual images of an underage person the least I'd do is go and speak to the employee. Wouldn't you?

I'm literally quoting the BBC feed.

Speak to your employee and what, they have rights, they'll bend you right over if you discipline them on the basis of an email and no one backing it up.

Explain how your talking to this employee would go and remember you cannot contact the person who made the complaint because they won't reply to the phone or email.

 

[Kenai]

Wow, seriously?

You wouldn't even speak to them?

You're acting like its a regular thing that people get accused of it.

No, I wouldn't start asking my employees if they've been buying underage pornography without a ****ing good reason to think any such accusation had some substance to it.

I'd absolutely try to verify that such a serious accusation had substance to it first.

It's worrying that you wouldn't frankly.

If my boss came to me asking if I had been buying underage porn because some randomer had said so without any verification, I'd be looking for a new job pretty quickly.

 

[Tony Edwards]

Wow, seriously?

You wouldn't even speak to them?

You're acting like its a regular thing that people get accused of it.

It probably is at the BBC.

Also is this real or did you add it for dramatic reasons?

If someone made an accusation against one of my employees that they had been paying for sexual images of an underage person

 

[Malevolence]

Ive seen a pic today of the person maybe involved, not the youngster, the older person, was sent to a workmate by someone I wouldn't think would send something like this and even where they got it from, workmate thinks they have sent it to him by mistake, trousers and pants down showing their backside in the mirror pic.
Has one like that been posted online and its a fake? I haven't really paid much attention on the subject until I saw this picture so no idea really even if they had sent pics the other way

Haven't seen the picture in question, but just because somebody has a dodgy photo out there doesn't make them suspect #1.

Hell, earlier I was sent a Morph selfie where he's standing their proudly displaying a rather impressive hard-on, it doesn't mean he's the BBC staff member in question either.

 

[GGizmo]

I'm literally quoting the BBC feed.

Speak to your employee and what, they have rights, they'll bend you right over if you discipline them on the basis of an email and no one backing it up.

Explain how your talking to this employee would go and remember you cannot contact the person who made the complaint because they won't reply to the phone or email.

Speaking to someone is about getting the other persons side of the story.

No, I wouldn't start asking my employees if they've been buying underage pornography without a ****ing good reason to think any such accusation had some substance to it.

I'd absolutely try to verify that such a serious accusation had substance to it first.

It's worrying that you wouldn't frankly.

If my boss came to me asking if I had been buying underage porn because some randomer had said so without any verification, I'd be looking for a new job pretty quickly.

Isn't part of trying to verify the accusation talking to the person being accused? I am verifying the facts by getting their side of the story.

From what you're saying you'd allow the accusation to linger over their head without saying anything?

I don't know how common in your world it is that people are accusing each other of buying underage images? I ask because you seem not to think that it would be out of the ordinary to be accused of that.

*I will add, if there is no underage element to this story then it's purely an employment issue.

 

[Tony Edwards]

*I will add, if there is no underage element to this story then it's purely an employment issue.

But is it? Surely they are allowed a personal life. If they arent doing anything illegal whats the problem?

 

[Hotwired]

Speaking to someone is about getting the other persons side of the story.


Isn't part of trying to verify the accusation talking to the person being accused? I am verifying the facts by getting their side of the story.

From what you're saying you'd allow the accusation to linger over their head without saying anything?

I don't know how common in your world it is that people are accusing each other of buying underage images? I ask because you seem not to think that it would be out of the ordinary to be accused of that.

*I will add, if there is no underage element to this story then it's purely an employment issue.

Verify what, the person complaining is literally ignoring you when you tried to contact them for more details before you make it a HR issue.

If you were employed and your boss asked if you'd been buying underage images you'd say no whether it was true or not. Now your boss needs to contact the person complaining again because the complaint sucks without someone willing to stand by the complaint. Or and this is the foresight part, you contact them first and make sure it's a solid complaint to go forward with. They just need to pick up the phone or reply to the emails.

Which they didn't... so how is any speaking to or disciplinary meant to happen without being grossly unfair or even illegal.

 

[Kenai]

Isn't part of trying to verify the accusation talking to the person being accused? I am verifying the facts by getting their side of the story.

From what you're saying you'd allow the accusation to linger over their head without saying anything?

I don't know how common in your world it is that people are accusing each other of buying underage images? I ask because you seem not to think that it would be out of the ordinary to be accused of that.

*I will add, if there is no underage element to this story then it's purely an employment issue.

There's nothing to linger until you've established there's some substance to a complaint.

It honestly astounds me you'd leap straight to taking such an issue to the employee directly before doing even the most basic of checks to ascertain whether it's anything with any substance to it whatsoever.

What seems to have happened here is (in crude terms) someone has got in touch with the BBC to say "your presenter has been buying pictures of my kid" and the BBC have asked for some kind of proof.

That's an entirely sensible and reasonable step to take before involving the employee, you can't jump straight to acting on every complaint or accusation received on the assumption it might be true.

I'm genuinely staggered you'd take such an issue straight to the employee, you'd be an HR departments worst nightmare!

 

[GGizmo]

There's nothing to linger until you've established there's some substance to a complaint.

It honestly astounds me you'd leap straight to taking such an issue to the employee directly before doing even the most basic of checks to ascertain whether it's anything with any substance to it whatsoever.

What seems to have happened here is (in crude terms) someone has got in touch with the BBC to say "your presenter has been buying pictures of my kid" and the BBC have asked for some kind of proof.

That's an entirely sensible and reasonable step to take before involving the employee, you can't jump straight to acting on every complaint or accusation received on the assumption it might be true.

I'm genuinely staggered you'd take such an issue straight to the employee, you'd be an HR departments worst nightmare!

If you can't contact the complainer then what basic checks can you do, other than speak to the person being accused?