Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Huw Edwards got me thinking…

134 replies

Friendsfestival · 03/08/2024 09:08

I read that Edwards received the photos without asking for them, then deleted them, then asked that similar ones not be sent again.

I don’t know if that’s true, and since none of us were at his trail listening to all the evidence I don’t want to get into the specifics of it. But my understanding is that if those were the facts he is still guilty of ‘making indecent images’. Does anyone know if that’s correct?

if it is, is that not quite scary? So I could be sent such images without my consent, delete them, ask not to be sent more, and be guilty of ‘making indecent images’ as well as the stigma that comes with being a convicted paedophile.

AIBU to think that the law is wrong here? Obviously victims need protecting but I’m not sure this does that.

OP posts:
SwingTheMonkey · 03/08/2024 09:33

CeruleanDive · 03/08/2024 09:27

Why don't you at least read a decent report of the trial? It should put your mind at rest.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/31/huw-edwards-pleads-guilty-to-making-indecent-images-of-children

Police are absolutely overwhelmed with possession of CSAM (child sex abuse material) cases. If you think they and the CPS are taking men to court who just happened to be sent spam, you can rest assured: no. Everything is analysed to see what actually happened.

Category A images are rape of a child, in this case a boy of 7-9 years old.

He was receiving the images and chatting to the convicted paedophile on WhatsApp from December 2020 to April 2022. At any point he could have blocked the guy.

Absolutely right. I’m so fed up of reading that poor Huwey was just caught up in something he didn’t intend to be in. He was clearly viewing images he liked for some time and some of those must have been of child sex abuse - even if they were young teens, it’s still CSA. We need to stop making excuses for him.

CeruleanDive · 03/08/2024 09:27

Why don't you at least read a decent report of the trial? It should put your mind at rest.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/31/huw-edwards-pleads-guilty-to-making-indecent-images-of-children

Police are absolutely overwhelmed with possession of CSAM (child sex abuse material) cases. If you think they and the CPS are taking men to court who just happened to be sent spam, you can rest assured: no. Everything is analysed to see what actually happened.

Category A images are rape of a child, in this case a boy of 7-9 years old.

He was receiving the images and chatting to the convicted paedophile on WhatsApp from December 2020 to April 2022. At any point he could have blocked the guy.

SwingTheMonkey · 03/08/2024 09:23

If you’ve received something illegal without your consent and you report it, you will not be prosecuted. Huw Edwards has been charged because he received lots of images over a period of months and continued to engage (discussed the pictures sent in ‘graphic’ detail) with the person sending them. Most likely because they were within the realms of his sexual interest- e.g teenager. When younger child sex abuse pictures were sent and the paedophile who sent them remarked that they ‘looked very young’, HE only then said not to send him anything illegal.

So no, op. No need to worry - unless you’re a raging paedophile and you’ve been sent stuff by a fellow nonce and you need to think of an alibi.

Original poster
Friendsfestival · 03/08/2024 09:15

PurpleMat · 03/08/2024 09:13

Whole thread about this yesterday!

Huw Edwards - receiving pics is a crime? - www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5132998-huw-edwards-receiving-pics-is-a-crime

Oh I hadn’t seen that. Thank you. Well, let’s end this one then! Sorry.

OP posts:
ViscountDreams · 03/08/2024 09:14

I've had the same thoughts.

The term 'making' is completely misleading in cases like this. The crimes covered under that charge need reviewing, splitting out and re-naming imo, to accurately describe what the crimes were.

I think H.E is a pathetic, porn-addled man but I don't think he's a paedophile.

Yozzer87 · 03/08/2024 09:13

If someone sent you images of children you would naturally report that person to the police.

PurpleMat · 03/08/2024 09:13

Whole thread about this yesterday!

Huw Edwards - receiving pics is a crime? - www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5132998-huw-edwards-receiving-pics-is-a-crime

DogwoodTree · 03/08/2024 09:13

I’ve not read that detail about Huw Edwards so can’t comment on that aspect but your post reminded me of a BBC radio programme I listened to a few years ago. It was made by a mum who was also a radio producer/journalist (I forget which!) and was about something really similar. Someone had sent an indecent image to their WhatsApp group. I think it was like a class WhatsApp or a NCT WhatsApp. Anyway, the rest of the group reported it to the police but then they were all investigated or potentially charged with receiving and storing indecent images. The radio programme was about that quirk in the law and also how traumatic it was for them to go through.

does anyone else remember that? I can’t remember enough precise details to google it for the link or synopsis. For obvious reasons, I don’t want to google the vaguer details above. I’d forgotten all about it until I read your post!

birdling · 03/08/2024 09:11

I think if that happened, you would take them straight to the police.