BBC suspend unnamed presenter

The police have determined that NO criminal act was committed,.
Let's just leave the fella alone.

 

She released a statement on his behalf. He's currently receiving hospital treatment for severe mental health issues. Doesn't sound in a good way.

 

Allegations coming in from his colleagues as well , his wife is a BBC producer

 

For those that haven’t seen it:



I couldn’t be as good as his wife and be so calm and outwardly supportive if I found my husband had been cheating on me but @Jay is right with what he posted before, some people both online and in the media wouldn’t stop until he’d killed himself.

 

Quite possibly the worst interpretation of what has actually happened in this whole saga.

You should apply to be a sun journo…

She has not snitched on him at all. She has released a statement on his behalf, including disclosing that he is in such a poor mental state he’s receiving treatment in hospital as an in-patient.

The police have concluded there is no criminality in the allegations they have been given.

Leave them the **** alone.

 

This is a bit like the Bairstow stumping argument, nothing illegal, but unethical?
Certainly is if he was asked to stop and didn’t and also used his celebrity status to coerce others as have come forward.
Maybe the guy needs help and if so hopefully he will get it, but he’s hardly an innocent party in this is he?
Either way that’s his career done.

 

Well, apart from the fact the police have said there's no evidence of a criminal offence.

 

I hope The Sun gets absolutely ******* ruined over this.

 

Lay off the guy!

 

It would be nice. Can't see it happening though.

 

Will never understand this. If someone is sending you things you don't want to see, or messages you don't want to read, block them on your phone or apps, and worse case scenario take yourself off social media. Also all other claims are allegations which may or may not be true but still contain no criminality. If he was using his position at work to seduce people at work I can see there being a case for disciplinary action, but texting people on dating apps and getting shirty when they threaten to expose your cheating is a marital issue. It's not in the public interest.

 

If a bloke had been paying a willing female for extras on OF, would there have been as much uproar and indignation from certain quarters as there has because he's been paying a consenting male.
Agreed he's no angel and I'm sure his wife is not particularly happy about this and may have a few difficult questions of him, but there's something else going on where the faux outrage is concerned.

 

Are we sure of the sex of any of the "young persons"? For me it's people with an anti-BBC agenda mixed with a soupcon of homophobia and jealousy that someone being paid from public fans can afford to splurge £35k on pornography. If he'd splurged it on gambling we'd have all been lumping on the evil bookmakers and the over exposure to betting companies.

 

Hopefully the media will now get back to reporting more important issues like the soaring mortgage rate or the problems faced by Ukraine re joining Nato or even celebrating the news that a previous PM has become a father for the 27th? time.
Hopefully no more dead cats!

 

Why should he have stopped just because an adult’s parents ask him to?

 

For me it depends on the family asking Edwards to stop thing, if he persisted after he was told they were trying to keep the kid ( then age 17) off drugs , then that’s wrong.
In this case he is also being paid by a publicly funded company.
Also the OF comparison, in comparison this seems far more seedy, in fact he could easily have access OF paid his money and gone along in a slightly less seedy way.

 

You can’t be serious JD.
First of all apparently he was only 17 at the onset, not an adult.
Even then if the kid had been 18 and he knew the reason that the parents wanted him to stop ( purchasing drugs) that’s plain wrong.
In fact if it had been my kid at that age I would have gone and had a word in person.

 

The person clearly wasn’t then 17 as that would be illegal and no crimes have been committed. If they want their child to stop taking drugs they need to get them proper help, not just make them have no money. The person could have easily made way more than £35k over three years doing any job, would they have told their boss to sack them so they had no money? That’s not the way to cure an addiction. Who pays Huw’s wages is irrelevant, he does his job he’s paid for and gets paid for it. He can then spend his money on any legal things he likes.

 

If he was only 17 at the outset wouldn't the police have found a criminal offence?

 

Maybe folk shouldn't be getting their " facts" from The Sun