The Huw Edwards situation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dis86 said:
I'm asking you to back your claims up with facts. It's not my position. Your position is the unsupported one.
Click to expand...
You've seen the answer yet you're choosing to be pedantic.

It's not going to be confirmed he paid for CP without a police investigation we don't know the full facts.

But common sense takes the hints being written that he paid this person thousands of pounds for sexually explicit images. Then in the next sentence it is said this started happening when the young person was 17.

In your scenario the police wouldn't be involved.
 
BowdonUK said:
You've seen the answer yet you're choosing to be pedantic.

It's not going to be confirmed he paid for CP without a police investigation we don't know the full facts.

But common sense takes the hints being written that he paid this person thousands of pounds for sexually explicit images. Then in the next sentence it is said this started happening when the young person was 17.

In your scenario the police wouldn't be involved.
Click to expand...

It's not pedantry at all. It's asking for the claim you're making to be supported. That's how facts work. You've literally just admitted you don't know the full facts in this post and yet you're still trying to claim it is a fact :cry:
 
Dis86 said:
Asking for facts and evidence is narcissistic? If you had sense you'd realise the point is I haven't made a decision and i'm calling out those who have despite what evidence is or isn't available. Rationality is acting on facts and evidence, not feelings.
Click to expand...

You're taking this thread in isolation where I stated you do similar in a few threads...

Dowiehole-esque TBH.

And, no, I won't be playing your next, very obvious, move here....
 
Dis86 said:
It's not pedantry at all. It's asking for the claim you're making to be supported. That's how facts work. You've literally just admitted you don't know the full facts in this post and yet you're still trying to claim it is a fact :cry:
Click to expand...
When are you going to answer why have the bbc contacted the police?

www.telegraph.co.uk

BBC calls in police over presenter accused of paying teenager for explicit images

Controversy threatening to engulf corporation prompts senior executives to contact the Met and request assistance
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

Police have been called in by the BBC to investigate a sex scandal allegedly involving one of its star presenters. A team from the corporation will meet detectives on Monday to assist with its investigation into the presenter, who was suspended on Sunday.
Click to expand...

If there were no sexually explicit images of a 17 year old there wouldn't be police involvement.

I trust the bbc know enough of the facts to approach the police with this situation.
 
BowdonUK said:
When are you going to answer why have the bbc contacted the police?

www.telegraph.co.uk

BBC calls in police over presenter accused of paying teenager for explicit images

Controversy threatening to engulf corporation prompts senior executives to contact the Met and request assistance
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk



If there were no sexually explicit images of a 17 year old there wouldn't be police involvement.

I trust the bbc know enough of the facts to approach the police with this situation.
Click to expand...

I've already answered that. There's a potential criminal act and its down to the police to gather evidence. Its not confusing...
 
There's obviously no real way to account for someone making stupid mistakes... but I question how anyone can feel so safe doing something unethical or perhaps illegal if it were not for the constant molly-coddling that the elites get in this country. It might not ever amount to anything knowing the psyche of the British blob, however being constantly berated for lets say putting a proverbial mountain of 'flour' up your nose when our supposed betters are drowning in it every other day whilst the police sit 'unaware' a few meters away is going to result in a severe adverse reaction at some point.

I know they won't because they're arrogant beyond description but they ought to perhaps take a moment to reflect on what's happening before their ivory towers get a little too close to the sun.
 
Last edited:
Well this thread is starting to give me flashbacks of the Nicola Bulley one.

From what I read the BBC passing to the police was in regards new information received on Thursday and not to do with the original complaint.
"New allegations were put to us on Thursday of a different nature and in addition to our own enquiries we have also been in touch with external authorities, in line with our protocols."
 
Haven't read any of the thread, but I did make it to about post 5 when this made me laugh out loud.

GrEjtje.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom