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.

The barrister is nothing to do with the BBC and is paid to say nice things. Pay is continued while on suspension most people don't turn down pay rises they are just given them.

HE being a criminal is not the fault of the bbc

If I was the sentencing judge (unlikely. as I’m not a judge at all I’d take a dim view of being told someone who had pleaded guilty to these charges was a person of exceptional character as it’s plainly untrue. I’m sure there is quite a lot that can be said in mitigation, in the sense that HE presumably doesn’t have a criminal record, has maintained a job/career, contributed to society etc, has pleaded guilty, but this shows a lack of insight and remorse that is very telling.

He had pictures of little boys under 9 - evil bastard

Wtf do his barrister’s comments have to do with the BBC? Anything else you want to blame the national broadcaster for?

Saying he is of exceptional character isn’t saying he didn’t do it.
When giving a character reference they aren’t talking about the said crime, they are talking about his standing in society hereto. That he hasn’t had previous convictions etc etc. To help inform the judge when sentencing.

The judge will also take into consideration that he pled guilty and wasn’t found guilty. That means not wasting courts time/money with a court case and having to deal with witnesses.

All these together can help reduce their sentence. Not dramatically but it helps

Pictures of a child between 7 and 9. Vile man.
Why was he given a huge pay rise? I agree with you OP, only the BBC would give a potential (and now definite) paedo a huge pay rise.

Only those who know him personally know if he’s a seedy perv? He had many photos and videos of child sexual abuse, category A.

I know he’s a depraved pervert, and I don’t need to know him personally to confidently state it.

About 30 years ago my best friends Dad who worked (alongside her mum) at HMRC (or whatever it was called back then). He pleaded guilty to 20 counts of sexual abuse of a minor and HMRC let him keep his job after he got a suspended. In fact my best friends Mother had to leave her job as they expected her to work alongside the man who abused her children.

As I read it he asked whoever was sending them not to send underage photos.
I am not excusing him, but as others have said, his barrister will point out anything favourable to mitigate the sentence that will be handed out.
I am not sure the BBC knew last year that he was charged with this crime. I believe he was charged in June this year.

The role of a barrister is to ensure a fair trial and advocate for their client. It does not mean the barrister has no moral compass. In this case Huw has pleaded guilty and the barrister is presumably advocating for a fair sentence. Fair doesn’t mean lenient. And the barrister doesn’t work for the BBC so I am not sure what the thread title means? Presumably Huw’s pay was inflated along with everyone else’s when he was suspended but I am not sure. That will presumably be determined by employment law.

Err, you are just repeating exactly what I said. He pleaded guilty and will be sentenced

Read the BBC statement. They knew in November 2023

No, they knew he'd been arrested. He wasn't charged until more recently.

They've said (and you can believe them or not), that he wouldn't have kept his job if he'd still be employed when he was actually charged.

Shocking, but it was many years ago.

Hardly "only at the BBC". Phillip Schofield was working at ITV.

Well said. I thought it was a stupid remark. Quite clearly he is NOT of good character, certainly not exceptional. The barrister seems to be confusing this word with famous

May I point out the HUGE difference? The BBC is funded by US

The BBC corporation knew (HR presumably) in November that he has been arrested but BBC News didn’t. He resigned in April. He hadn’t been charged yet. If he had been charged, they have said he would have been dismissed. Presumably this is employment law. Unless you work with children - then I think you can be dismissed if there a balance of probability that you are guilty.

However you at look at it, the pay rise is appalling!

The title of the thread is "Only at the BBC".

Not, for instance "Disgraceful of a broadcaster funded by us".

Hope he got his usual Christmas Hamper

Being involved in the abuse of children is more than just a secret and not some passing error of judgement. I'm more than disappointed. His deceit disgusts me.

I don't know the man. But I hope he rots.

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???

People who do this work will tell you that the system only works with robust prosecution and defence - it needs both sides to work in order to be effective. We have seen some of what can happen when the system is rigged, so should be grateful that people are willing to go out to do this work.

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.

Yes, it does not work that way. If your client tells you they are guilty, you cannot then claim they are innocent. That would be perjury. Lessen the blow - that is the job of lawyers always. But it is up to the judge to decide at the end of the day.

Not defending his actions which are vile, but it was the standard payrise across all staff that he got while he was suspended, not a specific payrise for him personally.

I agree it does not look good for the BBC, especially when you consider it following on from Jimmy Savile, Rolf Harris and Stuart Hall.

The barrister is only doing his job though.