I would encourage you to change the thread title mate. Seems to be making light of a horrendous charge. I’m sure that’s not your intention.
Can anyone remember the circumstances surrounding his initial suspension? I’d honestly forgotten about him until I saw this.
The allegation was that he’d paid someone for sexually explicit images. He was never charged though, and it was never confirmed how old the person was.
I think we need to bear in mind that ‘making indecent images of children’ as defined by law could actually be opening a message or email containing a naked/sexually suggestive image of a 16/17 year old. In the writing of the law ‘making’ can be as simple as opening or sharing an image, as opposed to creating it in the first place, and ‘child’ is anyone under 18. Not condoning it, not saying it isn’t against the law, but it is not paedophilia. Given what was stated at the time about the 17 year old etc, it seems more than possible that this might be the ‘child’ in question. That’s not to be said that it is. He could be a dangerous paedophile - we don’t know. But at least morally there is a world of difference in obtaining an image of a seventeen year old than a pre-pubescent child, even if the law is technically the same. Bizarrely he (and anyone) could have consensual sex with a 17 year old with no legal issue but be in breach of the law if he took (or obtained) a photo of them naked or engaging in such acts.
He is accused of having 6 category A images on his phone, 12 Cat B and 19 C. Cat A is penetrative Sexual content and B is no penetrative sexual content. You are correct that it is classed as under 18. The offences are said to have taken place over a 18 month period and involve a WhatsApp group. I agree we should allow due process to take place, however I doubt the CPS case is in belief he purely opened an image. I doubt anyone guilty of that as a single offence ends up in court. The example you give is a definite grey area of our law, I suppose the evidence will be laid put soon enough.
When he was on nearly all the time from Lizzie dying to being buried there were calls for him to be made a Sir for services to broadcasting. I bet Chuck is glad he bided his time.
No - we don't seem to have a significant game aginst Wales any time soon. Plus Gareth Bales has retired.
Going to be weird to see the Queen’s Funeral being treated like a 1970s episode of Top Of The Pops in future broadcasts.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/live-updates-huw-edwards-heads-33363352 Regular updates on that link.
I reckon he will get off with a suspended prison sentence but he should be doing jail time. What a disgusting individual. The BBC executives acting shocked and surprised at his behaviour, good god. Question is, who's next...