Page 8 | It was Huw

RestingMurderousFace · 12/07/2023 18:54

Businessflake · 12/07/2023 18:50

I agree, I feel deeply sorry for him if he has serious mental health issues but that does not excuse what he has done.

what has he done, exactly? The police don’t seem concerned with his actions at all.

There are some awful people on here. Have people learnt nothing from the tragic death of Caroline Flack?

Huw has had widely reported depression in the past.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61553142.amp

Sound the Caroline Flack Klaxon! The be #kind brigade have entered the building. 😆

nunsflipflop · 12/07/2023 18:55

So it has finally been confirmed that it is Huw Edwards, the same name that has been trending on Twitter since last week. I don’t think we all need to be sitting around picking the bones of the matter. We have to take on face value that no illegality has taken place. Morally he might be corrupt but until we know all the facts, no one can say.

I hope he is able to recover and if he feels he needs to, then tell his side of the story. Until then let’s leave his family in peace, they will have been through hell in the last week.

EddieMunsen · 12/07/2023 18:56

I am not surprised he's depressed if he's lived inside the closet for so long...allegedly.

Notatallanamechange · 12/07/2023 18:56

Attitudes being displayed on this thread are why papers like The Sun are so dangerous. Absolutely no thought about the implications they made, the questionable reporting and ignoring the so called ‘victim’ when he contacted them before publication and the fact the police have found nothing criminal.

Why are you still so keen to believe the rest of the story, even though the salacious part has been denied by the victim and the police have found no evidence of it? What evidence have they shown of ANYTHING seedy thus far?

lemmein · 12/07/2023 18:58

Notatallanamechange · 12/07/2023 18:56

Attitudes being displayed on this thread are why papers like The Sun are so dangerous. Absolutely no thought about the implications they made, the questionable reporting and ignoring the so called ‘victim’ when he contacted them before publication and the fact the police have found nothing criminal.

Why are you still so keen to believe the rest of the story, even though the salacious part has been denied by the victim and the police have found no evidence of it? What evidence have they shown of ANYTHING seedy thus far?

Because I understand how grooming affects victims 🤷🏻‍♀️

So do you think this boys parents just made the whole thing up?

Myonlysunshine123 · 12/07/2023 18:58

@AlrightJulia
Something major? Yea hes been caught acting a perve and now hes hiding under mental health, hes just a deviant, men with money are fucking dangerous, they think they're above everything morally

Tighginn · 12/07/2023 19:00

Him and Phillip will probably start their own channel, you don't get egos like that disappear.

Oddsockday · 12/07/2023 19:00

As long as he doesn't continue to preach about what a devout Christian he is then I suppose he deserves time to reflect on the mess he has caused.

HOWEVER he should have made the statement himself. That is the most telling thing.

Owning it would have produced a lot more respect.

WhamBamThankU · 12/07/2023 19:01

Call me sceptical, but it's very convenient timing of the current mental health episode. It's been known on Twitter for days, along with the rather grim photo of him showing his bare arse to the camera.

middler · 12/07/2023 19:02

I have empathy for him. We do not know the details of what happened, if the person was over 18, then as sordid as we may find it he has not broken a law and he now must deal with the repercussions which are huge. People do have compulsions they find hard to control and for some reason we reserve a special disgust for these kind of sexual things but so long as the other party was consenting as ' wrong' as w may find it, he hasn't killed anyone or broken a law and his life is changed forever now.

PollyThePixie · 12/07/2023 19:03

WhamBamThankU · 12/07/2023 19:01

Call me sceptical, but it's very convenient timing of the current mental health episode. It's been known on Twitter for days, along with the rather grim photo of him showing his bare arse to the camera.

It’s not proven that the picture was of him.

This situation is bad enough without people adding feet and legs to the story just for effect.

Businessflake · 12/07/2023 19:03

SomethingNastyInTheGenePool · 12/07/2023 18:50

Can I just remind you that the Sun didn’t even fucking bother to contact the “young person” for comment, or to publish their denial when he contacted them? That is not a sign of responsible journalism.

I don’t think anyone has ever accused the sun of responsible journalism!

Notatallanamechange · 12/07/2023 19:03

lemmein · 12/07/2023 18:58

Because I understand how grooming affects victims 🤷🏻‍♀️

So do you think this boys parents just made the whole thing up?

Show quote history

As do I. But The Sun have offered no evidence of anything. Until there’s any why are people still adamant he’s done something wrong? Surely people should be reserving judgement, rather than just pretending everything else they’ve said is true?

cushioncovers · 12/07/2023 19:06

NotInMyFrontGardenYouDont · 12/07/2023 18:46

Huw Edwards has apparently not done anything illegal.
He has acted immorally and possibly acted in a way that could cause the BBC to end his contract - either with a payoff or because he has breached it, depending on the terms of his contract.
Vicky his wife is herself politically savvy and probably acting to save her family's livelihood as much as genuinely concerned about his well being. And probably furious about his actions.
When he is well enough - and after having time to allow his lawyers to clear up/prepare himself to face the music - he will possibly issue a candid apology or statement of regret in the hope of salvaging his career. He may litigate against The Sun.
However I doubt viewers will have much stomach watching him on TV.
So.. early retirement for Huw possibly.

Agree

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 12/07/2023 19:06

DeeCee77 · 12/07/2023 18:29

100%

The only thing I wouldn't agree with is feeling for him as he did cheat on his wife. But yes, he did nothing illegal. This was a private matter and should never have made the news. That scummy rag will print anything.

Show quote history

I agree with a lot of this, but it isn't just a private matter. This man was the public face and voice of the BBC on some of the biggest news events of recent years - election night, the death of the Queen, her funeral, the Coronation. Now we find out he's allegedly done some really sleazy stuff. Given the BBC's record on employing not just Savile, who was outed after death unfortunately, but a good few other people who've been convicted of historic sex offences, they were always going to have to take this seriously. If the allegations are true, it brings the BBC into disrepute by association. He traded on his name and status.

PhoenixIsFlying · 12/07/2023 19:06

If anyone thinks they can actually believe what The Sun publishes and from this thread there are sadly many , I hang my head in shame.
Yes I can wholly believe that many things you read are completely made up. However rather than wait until the facts to come out , you would rather stick the knife in.

Telling us to wake up when your blinkers are most definitely on. Have an ounce of decency about you instead of mindlessly believing everything you read.

passthegingordon · 12/07/2023 19:07

Notatallanamechange · 12/07/2023 18:56

Attitudes being displayed on this thread are why papers like The Sun are so dangerous. Absolutely no thought about the implications they made, the questionable reporting and ignoring the so called ‘victim’ when he contacted them before publication and the fact the police have found nothing criminal.

Why are you still so keen to believe the rest of the story, even though the salacious part has been denied by the victim and the police have found no evidence of it? What evidence have they shown of ANYTHING seedy thus far?

100%.

Gowlett · 12/07/2023 19:07

I haven’t read anything about the whole thing, or watched the news. But I’m aware of the story, of course. Am I missing something? What were the pics? Isn’t absolutely everything available online? Or was it a long time ago?

SomethingNastyInTheGenePool · 12/07/2023 19:07

@Businessflake My point was that if they didn’t even do the bare minimum, why are we taking their word for anything in this story?

CherryCokeFanatic · 12/07/2023 19:10

I hope Huw feels better soon tbh

Museya15 · 12/07/2023 19:10

ForeverFriendsAndPierrot · 12/07/2023 18:54

Did that happen tho???

Really?

Show quote history

How do we know it didn't?

WildFlowerBees · 12/07/2023 19:10

Ah right, when you're caught the mental health card comes out.

The Priory, otherwise known as the hiding place.

Leaving his wife to air his dirty laundry. Poor woman and his kids they must be so upset.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 12/07/2023 19:11

Anonymouseposter · 12/07/2023 18:51

This is a messy, many layered issue.
The Sun has an agenda to discredit the BBC .
Other news has been overshadowed by this.
Why did the parents go to the Sun rather than the police??
The way in which the BBC handled the parent's initial complaint needs thorough investigation.
Huw Edwards has behaved appallingly but, at this point, it seems not illegally.
We are not psychiatrists and haven't assessed him so we aren't in a position to say to what degree his mental health problems have contributed to his behaviour.
It is possible that he is currently suicidal as a result of his behaviour being exposed.
I am not excusing him but I wish people would put the pitchforks away and let his employers, health providers and the police deal with this rationally.
Perhaps other issues which have gone under the radar will now be covered on the news.

Agreed. I will just add that the parents say they went to the police in April and a police force (assume the Met) confirmed today or yesterday that they said there was no case to answer. Hence the parents' decision to go to the BBC instead. The Met has just announced again that they still think there is no case to answer.

lightisnotwhite · 12/07/2023 19:12

Genuine question . If communications started when the kid was 17 but explicit pictures/videos didn’t start until he was an adult a few months later would that be legal? Or would the chat with a 17 year old be considered grooming.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 12/07/2023 19:12

Museya15 · 12/07/2023 19:10

How do we know it didn't?

Show quote history

As far as I know, nobody has confirmed which sex the various complainants are. The use of 'they' to refer to them has led a lot of people to assume they're male.