Only at the BBC

[teddyandgypsy]

Barrister to Huw Edwards has just described his client as a man of exceptional character. Astonishing. Such character that when suspended he immediately claimed mental health and went and hid in the Priory, leaving his wife to face the cameras. And did he resign? Well, not for nearly a year, during which time he accepted a £40,000 pay RISE on top of his annual £425,000. Yeah, real character. When he did eventually resign, he it seems to have been prompted by the fact that he had been charged. What a bloke.

Barrister is doing his job defending his client and this is taking place in court, not 'at the BBC'. Nothing astonishing is going on whatsoever.
So many daft reactive threads. Just let the law take its course.

I'm so disappointed with this man.

There are no morals anywhere these days.

There are but lots of people have secrets. He is/was just a newsreader, susceptible to all the foibles people have. Believing that someone eg who reads the news on TV has a moral compass is foolish. Boris was PM and he certainly had none. Other MPs, TV people and ordinary folk are available.

That is an overreaction. You do not know him personally, I presume. Why then should you be disappointed in him, unless you have attached some moral standard of behaviour onto him, based on your visual analysis of how he presents.

Well I suppose as he’s his defence barrister he’s got to try and conjure up something to say. “ He’s scum” might be true but isn’t going to keep the barrister in work.

It’s not ‘only at the BBC’ though is it, it’s people everywhere sadly, and someone being in the public eye doesn’t stop them.

That's what defence barristers do
It appears to the public that he is has an exceptional character because of his standing at the BBC
Only those who know him personally know if he's a seedy perv.
I was surprised he didn't resign immediately unlike similar presenters in the public eye.

Prob a shock to some of his friend/colleagues. No one advertises what they are up to on the internet as many on here find out from smart phones/laptops. It's the Barristers job to prove Huw is innocent or at least get the lowest sentence for him.

Well, its getting better by the hour. The BBC now admits it knew in November 2023 that Edwards had been charged. Yet they went on paying his full salary, including a pay rise. As I said, only at the BBC.

Why would he be trying to prove innocence when his client has pleaded guilty????

I've just seen he received 41 messages from a convicted paedophile
Sickening

Innocent until proven guilty but now it's about getting the minimum term.

Charged yes but those charges would have to be proven. Until then he would remain suspended.

Not in any company I've ever worked in

What is it about pleading guilty to all charges that you don't understand?

I genuinely don't know how defence lawyers can sleep at night when they know full well that the individual they are defending is guilty of a disgusting crime, yet it is their job to get them off.

I understand your feelings but it has to be done. Lawyers in the public sector are not free to pick and choose who they defend and must take the next case handed to them by the CPS. Of course Edwards barrister has a choice but he will exact a pretty penny in fees I am sure. One also wonders how far the Beeb is mixed up in this. Wouldn't look good for it to come out in Court that in between commenting on our late Queen's funeral, the saintly Huw was flicking through his phone. Bet his barrister has had a word in his ear about keeping the Beeb out of it as much as possible.

Mitigation for sentencing

Sorry to split hairs, but if he claims his client is innocent, the judge will instruct him to change his plea to not guilty and send him for trial.

He's still a nonce though isn't he 😉

He was charged but unless those charges were/are proved or a guilty plea entered then there is always the presumption of innocence. What part of that do you not understand? Now a guilty plea is entered it's about mitigation.

I've often wondered this too. I mean, I know it's their job and they probably get paid a tidy penny but does your moral compass not come in somewhere???
I know I couldn't stand there and defend somebody like that and others and be able to sleep at night.

One day you are defence another prosecution. But everyone is entitled to a defence. At least in democratic countries.

Perfect response, and the only one that is required about a still-ongoing legal case.

One day you are defence another prosecution. But everyone is entitled to a defence. At least in democratic countries.

Well I'm thankful I didn't go down that route then!
I appreciate that everyone is innocent until proven guilty but if the person has said they're guilty, there's no way I could stand there to try to get them off or lessen the blow for them. No way.