The Huw Edwards situation

[Felon]

This story was pitched as underage sex crime. Then the specific wording which describes an underage sex crime was deleted from further publication, then the police said jog on x2. That's the context of people scrabbling around in Huws text messages after a national request was made for any dirt or suspicion of dirt on him.

That I will agree with, this whole thing has just been a total and utter farce...

If it turns out, after all this - that he's basically done nothing wrong, that the allegations are so weak they don't require any investigation - then I hope the people at the Sun get dragged to court screaming.

On the other hand if he has been a naughty boy, then he has to pay the consequences, but the whole thing has been blown up beyond all proportion..

 

[ebilcake]

It's funny as those who bang the drum about morally unacceptable acts should carry heavy punishments even if legal are usually hypocrites throwing stones from their glass houses...
I'm looking at some people in here...

Wait, so you just attempted to justify the immoral actions of an individual because you assume everyone here is guilty of similar immoral actions. Wow, speak for yourself, don't assume our moral standards are as low as yours.

 

[Felon]

Genuine question, should we apply the same criteria to newspaper journalists. If not why not.
Boris with all his known moral issues, is hammering away at a keyboard, producing yet more dubious "news", and getting paid similar to Huw

To be honest, I imagine one problem here is that the BBC are scared of their own shadow with stuff like this, any minor hint of sexual misconduct and they have no choice other than to go in guns-blazing, especially after everything they've been through over the last 10-20 years, it can't help..

 

[Ali195]

Dragging MPs into the discussion is just a diversion, I mean - if elected MPs are sending inappropriate messages to junior staffers, bin them - no problems there, but this is really about Hew Edwards, not MPs.

They don't get binned though, that's the issue, infact it gets laughed about, with nicknames like pincher by nature, pincher by name. It's prolific in the House Of Commons, so if they're allowed to get away with it why does the same not apply to Hew?

Like with the sub sinking, it'll be forgotten about soon enough and people won't care one bit if he's back on the news or not.

 

[Felon]

They don't get binned though, that's the issue, infact it gets laughed about, with nicknames like pincher by nature, pincher by name. It's prolific in the House Of Commons, so if they're allowed to get away with it why does the same not apply to Hew?

I'm not saying they should get away with it - but I don't really know what you want me to do or say? It's not fair that the rules aren't applied equally, but then again life isn't fair - I'm not really sure what else to say?

 

[sidimmu]

Wait, so you just attempted to justify the immoral actions of an individual because you assume everyone here is guilty of similar immoral actions. Wow, speak for yourself, don't assume our moral standards are as low as yours.

Another taken offense to it, maybe take a look in the mirror.

I haven't justified his actions at all, maybe read the room and my post again before jumping to conclusions.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

To be honest, I imagine one problem here is that the BBC are scared of their own shadow with stuff like this, any minor hint of sexual misconduct and they have no choice other than to go in guns-blazing, especially after everything they've been through over the last 10-20 years, it can't help..

Which is fine to me, as long as its applied equally to all within the organisation.
If they become known as a really OTT employer with unreasonably policies they would drop down the list in order of preference.

The BBC however clearly didn't see a massive issue early on since (if true) they reached out for more clarification, then didnt get a reply.
I am sure this happens a lot, someone complains, they try to make contact, get no contact, so assume it was a hoax.

 

[ebilcake]

Another taken offense to it, maybe take a look in the mirror.

I haven't justified his actions at all, maybe read the room and my post again before jumping to conclusions.

No offence taken.

You can spin it anyway you want, at best you're accusing anyone questioning the morality of his actions of being equally as immoral.

This might be the worst strawman I've ever heard.

 

[bigmike20vt]

If the allegations are true, and Hew was sending inappropriate messages to junior co-workers, along with paying tens of thousands for sexy pictures (legally), does anyone here think that this isn't a problem, and his job at the BBC should be reinstated immediately?

the sexy pics if legal (and therefore consentual) nowt to do with us...... harrasing co workers, he should be at least disciplined possibly fired depending on severity (remember just because someone takes offence at something doesnt mean you were offensive I could be the employee was over sensitive, got the wrong end of the stick or even possibly have an agenda of their own..... which is why it needs to be investigated NOT broadcast to the world.

even then however, its a sliding scale (is a manager disciplining you due to shoddy work bullying? not always but it can be, and is often construed as that!.

but either way, what it isnt is worthy of the spread the news have done on him, not only but mostly by the Sun.

 

[sidimmu]

No offence taken.

You can spin it anyway you want, at best you're accusing anyone questioning the morality of his actions of being equally as immoral.

This might be the worst strawman I've ever heard.

Reality a dish you don't like?
people who expect the most out of everyone typically are not the highest standing citizens themselves.

Again it's none of our business what he does in his own time.

 

[Felon]

but either way, what it isnt is worthy of the spread the news have done on him, not only but mostly by the Sun.

I suppose the Sun would argue that somebody went to them with an allegation, and it was their job to publish a story, which they did - without naming the person in question.

You could argue more widely about the "gutter press" and whatnot, but at the end of the day, they reported an allegation - the fact everybody lost their mind, I'm not sure is totally down to the Sun.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I suppose the Sun would argue that somebody went to them with an allegation, and it was their job to publish a story, which they did - without naming the person in question.

You could argue more widely about the "gutter press" and whatnot, but at the end of the day, they reported an allegation - the fact everybody lost their mind, I'm not sure is totally down to the Sun.

Had they not massively over sensationalised it, then continued to try to dig deeper and deeper as they started to get criticism, then you may have a point.

There feels something off on this one. Even if Huw ends up being sacked etc.
I am not convinced by the parents story. I could end up being wrong, but again, something feels off.

The sun wanted everyone to go full froth on this. I am certain they had pictures of cappacino machines in full milk frothing mode when the sensationalised it as they did.

 

[Nitefly]

Had they not massively over sensationalised it, then continued to try to dig deeper and deeper as they started to get criticism, then you may have a point.

There feels something off on this one. Even if Huw ends up being sacked etc.
I am not convinced by the parents story. I could end up being wrong, but again, something feels off.

The sun wanted everyone to go full froth on this. I am certain they had pictures of cappacino machines in full milk frothing mode when the sensationalised it as they did.

My hunch is that the parents were fairly concerned about the health of their child (who wouldn’t be concerned for their kid), the beeb didn’t really make any progress, parents decided they had to go nuclear, the sun thought it was really juicy and wanted maximum attention / sales without really thinking it through.

As to whether Huw has done anything ‘wrong’, it’s not obvious.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

My hunch is that the parents were fairly concerned about the health of their child (who wouldn’t be concerned for their kid), the beeb didn’t really make any progress, parents decided they had to go nuclear, the sun thought it was really juicy and wanted maximum attention / sales without really thinking it through.

As to whether Huw has done anything ‘wrong’, it’s not obvious.

Thats not far off my views in general.
The sun went to excessive lengths in making out the parents to be beacons of light, that always gets my suspicion going. Maybe fully off piste on this one.

 

[n111ck]

There's always a historic angle with these BBC presenter scandals..

'Huw Edwards rumour' was a joke referenced in The Thick of It 18 years ago

The clip resurfaced as Huw Edwards' wife Vicky Flind announced him as the presenter accused of allegedly paying a teenager more than £35,000 for sexually explicit pictures

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Would you let him babysit your kids?

I don't have kids and I don't know him and I'd only let someone I knew personally baby sit my kids if I had them.

Just because he likes younger adults doesn't mean he has sexual fantasies about children. I'm not sure why you think it does.

So anyone who watches porn with 18 year old girls in it is a nonce. Or is just if they are old they are a nonce and if they are rich and a public figure they are a super nonce.

Edit: oh and judging by your posts on here I wouldn't let you baby sit my kids either.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Bad stuff happens all the time in life. I am not saying people shouldn't talk about stuff and mental health is something that needs looking after by whatever means possible but when people slap the card on the table just to get some sympathy it is just pathetic and offensive to people who are really dealing with some really bad times.

Mental health is a broad range in that at one extreme you could compare some mental health conditions to cancer but on the other hand you can compare some mental health conditions to the common cold.

If I ever decided to go behind my missus back and bang some teenage girls it is all on me and I must face up to the consequences not check myself in to some "mental hospital" (Not that I could afford it anyway). Lack of accountability for your actions has got nothing to do with mental health.

He has a long history with depression. He has done interviews where it is mentioned. He hasn't suddenly developed it out of nowhere. I think its not inconceivable that with everything that has happened he might feel he has bought shame on his family and perhaps his colleagues. He could maybe be forgiven for feeling depressed, likely suicidal.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

People in the public eye are de facto role models for everyone else, damn right the expectations for their behaviour are higher than simply being legal. If you want to do questionable stuff (especially of a sexual nature) don't be famous.

What nonsense. People who put themselves in the public eye and claim to live moral lives and tell others they should also lead moral lives could be expected to be held to account if they then do "immoral" things. Being a journalist and then ending up as a news reader isn't that. Just like being an actor isn't or a musician isn't that. Just because your job has made you famous doesn't mean you should be held to standards the rest of us aren't. You are making an argument for the idea that fame is something to be looked up to and almost worshiped. That is the last thing that should be happening.

Of course your career could suffer if something you do gets splashed across the tabloid rags but having some sexual kink is none of our business and if I had my way they wouldn't be able to publish it without serious threat of litigation.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

The mum speaks.. what was Huw thinking..

Parents of youngster in Huw Edwards scandal consumed by fear & injustice

AS a newspaper reporter I’ve sat down with hundreds of families who have trusted me to tell their stories. But when I was politely ushered into the living room of a smart terraced home a fortnight …

www.thesun.co.uk

What a load of rubbish story. None of it made any sense.

Parents claimed they spoke to police and authorities?

If police had been investigated parents's complaints, looked at medical, authorities and hotels records, interviewed her 23 years old daughter and took her hair samples tested for crack drugs for up to 90 days but found no evidence of drugs, no evidence of drug dealer meetings and location and also no evidence of medical and authorities records!

Bizzare and very odd!

If i were her 17 years old daughter parent 6 years ago found she took drugs, she had meetings with drug dealer at a house then I would reported to police, NSPCC, social work and medical GP then police would found drugs in daughter hair sample and followed NSPCC advice, had National Crime Agency raided and arrested drug dealer at his place and then social work and medical GP would refer daughter to drug rehab centre to see psychologist.

Her parents are either have schizophrenia mental illness like my brother in law got for over 23 years now or maybe con artists, scammers or pathological liar.

 

[Tony Edwards]

What nonsense. People who put themselves in the public eye and claim to live moral lives and tell others they should also lead moral lives could be expected to be held to account if they then do "immoral" things. Being a journalist and then ending up as a news reader isn't that. Just like being an actor isn't or a musician isn't that. Just because your job has made you famous doesn't mean you should be held to standards the rest of us aren't. You are making an argument for the idea that fame is something to be looked up to and almost worshiped. That is the last thing that should be happening.

Of course your career could suffer if something you do gets splashed across the tabloid rags but having some sexual kink is none of our business and if I had my way they wouldn't be able to publish it without serious threat of litigation.

Yes its not like he is a priest or anything like that.