Huw Edwards makes me sick

[ruthgordon123]

The chump has just put his 4.7 million pound house on the market. Isn't that mostly our money?

Pretty beige

It's not your money at all. But yes he's foul.

Eh? What garbled nonsense is this? Honestly, I despair at the levels of eduction in this country. Ironically, the BBC have a well respected division producing educational programming and online content - the OP would do well to use it.

This sounds absolutely bonkers 😂

It genuinely worries me how many adults lack critical thinking skills and are oblivious to how the world actually functions

Found myself in a very confusing chat about the current situation in the Middle East, only to realise the other person had no idea that Judaism and Islam were different religions.

You can't argue with stupid. Well, you can but it's exhausting.

Eww. That's not a selling point for the house.

He didn't get anything from me.

If you are talking about the TV licence, that pays for all BBC staff, he was only one of goodness knows how many. on the payroll The BBC is very good, I watch a lot of TV and it's worth every penny. It is hardly the Beeb's fault that Huw Edwards did what he did and he is likely not the only one by a long chalk; people like him are in all organisations and walks of life and are expert at keeping things hidden.49

There was nothing wrong with his work, for which he was paid, in fact he was good at his job.

What he did has made most people feel sick but constantly going on about it achieves nothing.

He is finished, end of.

What he does with his house is his business and, presumably, it also belongs to his wife from whom he is now separated. They both need somewhere to live so it makes sense to sell. It is not our business!

I'm prepared to bet that his wife is entitled to 50% or more of that so no, it isn't mostly our money.

Do you watch BBC programmes? Why do you think all the people who work on them should do so without pay? Because that is the only way they could be broadcast if the BBC isn't allowed to charge.

So by this logic, any public servant, paid by the public purse, we own their stuff? So Civil Service, Council employees, MPs, Doctors, Nurses, Teachers etc.

I've read some batshit stuff on here over the years by people lacking in grey matter, but this has got to be right near the top in the fuckwittery charts.

But surely he was paid the money for doing a job, however hateful he is, so how is it our money?

OMG! I'm gobsmacked by this. Surely no adult is that uninformed?

We in the UK also have to pay the TV licence (which goes to the BBC), if we watch ANY broadcast TV, even if we never watch the BBC.

Personally, I will still pay when it changes to become a specific subscription fee for the BBC, as I enjoy a great deal of the BBC's output - whilst also recognising its many, many flaws at its heart (and certain people who work for it).

Yep, sad but true. They also didn't know Israel was only created just after WWII. I mean, where do you even start.....?

Well presumably his wife had a hand in buying it since she earns well too. And probably wants the equity out asap so she can buy a new family home for herself and the children. I don't begrudge her that, do you OP?

The more pertinent point is that he is a dirty, morally bankrupt pdf file who pays for videos of children being tortured and managed to get away with it without any consequence what so ever. And yes it's a slap in the face that the has so much money, not because it's 'ours' but because in my world he would be behind bars and every penny he has would have been given to the victims to try and make their lives better. This is why I think more people need to cancel their tv licenses. This is what you are finding.

What are you on? Criminals don't just get liquidated by the state, however much you might dislike them.

I'd imagine he's selling for security reasons and to adjust to his new life with substantially reduced earnings and no friends.

He got sentenced in line with what other people are sentenced for similar crimes.

The BBC wasn't responsible for sentencing and the principle of innocent until proven guilty is an important one.

He'd cost you a lot more behind bars, by the way. Prison is expensive.

Yes YABU.

You pay a licence fee to the BBC (it’s not compulsory) for all their content. Unless you’ve been watching nothing but Huw for donkey’s years, you’ve got your money’s worth. If you disagree stop paying it.

Under the criminal law, people who earn money from criminal activity have it confiscated- it’s called the proceeds of crime- but this only works for acquisitive crimes. Much as what happened with Hugh Edwards is appalling he did not make any money from his activities, in fact he earned his salary fairly and squarely by doing lots of TV work. Whatever you think of the man he put the hours in and got paid for it. It’s his money.

Plus, the man’s life has been ruined already and the proceeds from the sale of his house are probably going towards paying for his wife to have somewhere to live and an income for her. If compensation for his victims has been ordered that will be paid from his income too. If we make Huw and his wife both destitute the state will have to support him- what good would that do?

Ok, so, if Huw Edwards had been on the news five nights a week every week during the time he was prominent at the BBC, on both the Six O'clock news and the Ten O'Clock news, that would have made up about 1.9% of programming up to 1999, at which point the BBC went 24 hours, and around 1.5% between then and 2023 when he quit. That proportion of your licence fee between 1994 and 2023 is about 60 quid.

HOWEVER, only half the value of the house is his and there are approx 24 million other license fee payers also due that refund from him, so your pro rata payout would be about 10p.

I could dig deep and donate this to you OP if it would make you feel better.

The thing with people like this isn't necessarily their lack of knowledge is it?
There is tons I don't know, I'm not hugely informed on world politics etc, but it's the fact they usually hold such strong opinions about things they know precisely nothing about, and they tell you to 'do your research' or my personal favourite from a work colleague 'Andrew Tate said it on Twitter, and he's known for telling the truth, unlike mainstream media'

Thanks @TheHangingGardensOfBasildon, from the OP it sounded like it was purely for the BBC.

FGS. You really are lacking in critical thinking.

he was paid to do a job, a job which he did incredibly well for many years. It's HIS money, not 'ours'. Whatever else he's done has nothing to do with the money he earned legitimately.

its NOT compulsory to have a TV licence, but it is illegal to use a service which you have not paid for.

Someone will...and there's no reason why not.

I find the fixation on wishing as much ill as possible on individual perpetrators (and their employers in this case) unhealthy and frankly rather macabre.

I haven’t given HE much thought at all since he was sentenced - which is a while ago now. There are much bigger questions around the scale of the problem, how we go about addressing it, appropriate sentencing and so on.

Society should be pushing for prevention and supporting victims, not obsessing over fantasy extra-judicial punishment of high-profile offenders in this way. And I think the idea that I, in my role as a license payer, am owed something over this particular case is both ridiculous and distasteful.