Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
about the deviant BBC guy...thread still on politics...maybe he's been nailed on here..
Show More
I'm behind on the bloke paying a 17yr old for pictures. The presenter has not been named. However, a BBC presenter has been reported by his colleagues to be spending more time with his family.
The name can "legally" be stated now. There is no injunction. Trouble is, if you name the wrong person, they might sue you and Betfair (which is why the mods will delete the thread). Ironically, one of those doing the suing is Jeremy Vine after he was wrongly accused on Twitter.
But yes, if it is only a question of time before the BBC chap is named then he might as well come forward, except now the police are involved which complicates things.
But yes, if it is only a question of time before the BBC chap is named then he might as well come forward, except now the police are involved which complicates things.
I happened to be watching TV early this morning and one of the presenters said "so and so" would taking time off to spend more time with his family. Buy coincidence there was barely any coverage of the suspended presenter except the legal ping-pong between the girl's expensive and posh lawyer and The SUN.
why does anyone at the beeb get paid so much money that they can afford to pay 35k for nuddy pics ?
about time the public set the salaries. newsreader - max £45k weatherperson £28k match of the day presenter £37k one show £29k
alex jones £449,000 for her presenting role on The One Show. jenas a quarter of a million. just ridiculous money.
presenting a show, reading an autocue. it's not open heart surgery ....
about time the public set the salaries. newsreader - max £45k weatherperson £28k match of the day presenter £37k one show £29k
alex jones £449,000 for her presenting role on The One Show. jenas a quarter of a million. just ridiculous money.
presenting a show, reading an autocue. it's not open heart surgery ....
The now 20yo contacted the sun before printing saying it was rubbish and not to print it, if it was just a news story that would be the end of it, after researching the mother. All the sheep getting angry about this - wd for being so easily manipulated by a fecking comic for morons run by criminal morons!
35k over 3-4 years = you obv not making enough on here Hulk!
What's the bigger crime,, what's happened here in this case? or Micah Richards being paid a salary of £200,000??
i maintain if you can set aside £8k a year for four years into a nuddy picture kitty you're probably getting paid too much.
the person in question, whoever he or she is, may or may not be earning £435,000 pa.
roughly 3 times what the prime minister earns. for reading the fooking news ....
the person in question, whoever he or she is, may or may not be earning £435,000 pa.
roughly 3 times what the prime minister earns. for reading the fooking news ....
i'll read it for £415,000
that's £20k of the licence fee saved straight away ...
that's £20k of the licence fee saved straight away ...
Most Premiership footballers could pay £350k for dirty pictures. There perhaps should be some perspective on BBC salaries tbf.
I wonder how much GB News presenters are being paid for attracting a miniscule audience.
I wonder how much GB News presenters are being paid for attracting a miniscule audience.
The Sun newspaper has spoken to a fourth younger person, a 17-year-old who at the time was still at school, who received messages from the suspended BBC presenter said to contain love hearts and kisses.
They are coming out of the Wood Work .............
They are coming out of the Wood Work .............
@casemoney -- the "abusive and menacing messages to second young person" were in response to the second young person threatening to out the BBC presenter, which might be taken to be a spot of attempted blackmail.
What’s wrong with the damn internet, why hasn’t an international news site named them yet?
Bengali times or sumat?
Or is it that they have and the internet now has so many gatekeepers that we no better than -hooking China yet don’t know it?
As for the bbc or the sun, I wouldn’t give either the steam off my own p1ss.
I once liked the bbc and defended them, now all I do is chunter at how they are over inclusive and how I have to subsidise 5hit for idiots on a Saturday night.
The Sun no better, I remember a kid once brought that rag into school, nowt came of him.
You can be sure there is now a hotline for anyone with tickle tackle to help The Sun’s future legal case as they both become entrenched and legal vermin get another chance of flesh.
Bengali times or sumat?
Or is it that they have and the internet now has so many gatekeepers that we no better than -hooking China yet don’t know it?
As for the bbc or the sun, I wouldn’t give either the steam off my own p1ss.
I once liked the bbc and defended them, now all I do is chunter at how they are over inclusive and how I have to subsidise 5hit for idiots on a Saturday night.
The Sun no better, I remember a kid once brought that rag into school, nowt came of him.
You can be sure there is now a hotline for anyone with tickle tackle to help The Sun’s future legal case as they both become entrenched and legal vermin get another chance of flesh.
If I was pricing it up he would have been the absolute outsider of the field
Huw never can tell, jimmy. Even outsiders can win swinging on the bridle..
They do indeed pro
I think I’m right in remembering he announced the news on bbc of the passing of our queen and was playing the lead role throughout the period leading up to her funeral and again the lead of her funeral itself.
If true would this mean when future generations are shown archive of the events around that time he will be edited out ?
I think I’m right in remembering he announced the news on bbc of the passing of our queen and was playing the lead role throughout the period leading up to her funeral and again the lead of her funeral itself.
If true would this mean when future generations are shown archive of the events around that time he will be edited out ?
Interesting, BESTY. So 1 of them is misinformed/lying. Unlike "reputable" UK sauces, they've not as much to lose if they call it wrong..
that's 2 days old news/guesses, I think everyone knows who it is now. It is HE.
Bored now. Whatever happened, this is not Savile or even Schofield despite the Sun using the word "child" to describe men well over the age of consent in order to get a paedo vibe going.
What we have is a BBC bloke on gay dating sites. The only allegation that anything illegal happened is around whether there was a nude pic sent when the now 21yo "child" was 17. He has denied it, and the Sun does not believe the mother's claim enough to print it.
Oh, and a new allegation that he might have broken (or at least proposed breaking) lockdown. You know, like the Sun's deputy editor did.
BBC bloke got angry when the 2nd chap threatened to out him (or blackmail him). So would anyone, and angry messages aren't illegal.
Selling dirty pictures is not illegal. Buying dirty pictures is not illegal. Unless the BBC bloke moonlights as the Archbishop of Canterbury, it doesn't matter if he wants to spend all day on OnlyFans.
To quote Boris, this is an inverted pyramid of piffle.
What we have is a BBC bloke on gay dating sites. The only allegation that anything illegal happened is around whether there was a nude pic sent when the now 21yo "child" was 17. He has denied it, and the Sun does not believe the mother's claim enough to print it.
Oh, and a new allegation that he might have broken (or at least proposed breaking) lockdown. You know, like the Sun's deputy editor did.
BBC bloke got angry when the 2nd chap threatened to out him (or blackmail him). So would anyone, and angry messages aren't illegal.
Selling dirty pictures is not illegal. Buying dirty pictures is not illegal. Unless the BBC bloke moonlights as the Archbishop of Canterbury, it doesn't matter if he wants to spend all day on OnlyFans.
To quote Boris, this is an inverted pyramid of piffle.
Agree Ramruna , if he's proven innocent then who cares about the identity anyway.
It IS illegal if the picture was taken when the person was 17,which in itself is odd because he could have s**gged them quite legally assuming it was consensual.
Having said that I quite agree this shows no signs of being anything like SaVILE.
Having said that I quite agree this shows no signs of being anything like SaVILE.
Presumably, then - This man's tendency towards young men - Then becomes just a Domestic issue between himself, his wife, and several children.
Have a hell of a job keeping the consequent Divorce quiet, though.
Have a hell of a job keeping the consequent Divorce quiet, though.
Jul 12, 2023 -- 11:32AM, jimnast wrote:
They do indeed proI think I’m right in remembering he announced the news on bbc of the passing of our queen and was playing the lead role throughout the period leading up to her funeral and again the lead of her funeral itself.If true would this mean when future generations are shown archive of the events around that time he will be edited out ?
Did he have his trousers on?
Rammy, forget The Sun and their obvious agenda. The main focus here should remain on the BBC. Had they acted appropriately when this problem first arose, there would've been no weighted stick to batter them with. Timmy is now speaking of better "protocols and procedures".. as if the Savile scandal never existed. You'd think after such a cover-up disaster they'd be going out of their way to remain as vigilant and transparent as possible - eager to act swiftly when any potential problem arises. The scale in comparison to Savile is not the point. The BBC rightfully classed this complaint as "very serious" and yet they went about it like doctors chucking a dying man into an empty room for the night.. casually telling themselves "he'll be FINE until the morning"..and of course when they enter in the morning to give him aid(the aid he could've/should've been receiving last night) he's pan bread.
Many of us will agree we don't give a flying **** what any other does in their private life(provided it's legal) but it's unrealistic to believe such a giant publicly funded service isn't guided by an expectation to live within certain standards of conduct(from top2bottom) Any employer can remove that expectation if they wish, simply by being BOLD and unwavering with their beliefs&policies. How likely is that? And so they should focus on having zero culpability.
Many of us will agree we don't give a flying **** what any other does in their private life(provided it's legal) but it's unrealistic to believe such a giant publicly funded service isn't guided by an expectation to live within certain standards of conduct(from top2bottom) Any employer can remove that expectation if they wish, simply by being BOLD and unwavering with their beliefs&policies. How likely is that? And so they should focus on having zero culpability.
The BBC may be hoping that Edwards will now hand in his resignation under the guise of an early retirement or whatever. He ain't going to do that .... not while he's suspended with FULL PAY. He's going to draw it out as long as possible I reckon!
If the pic posted by 'ProSniper' (10:51) is true I'm glad I did not name the presenter in my earlier post. He was not the same BBC presenter as posted by 'ProSniper'.
I still don’t believe it’s him
Not until I hear it officially.
I have seen a few recently who I’d have thought more likely, that clearly can’t have been them. A really strange experience watching a gay newsreader read out news about the bbc and be a little bit smug about it.
Not until I hear it officially.
I have seen a few recently who I’d have thought more likely, that clearly can’t have been them. A really strange experience watching a gay newsreader read out news about the bbc and be a little bit smug about it.
Attention now fully focused on his mental health ...probably he'll be advised to play up that side of it too...
If true this Royal Commentator is a big beast at the Beeb. As such more likely to be pretty cosy with senior management. But, my one was named by his colleagues early yesterday morning (8am).
I’m with dusty here find it very hard indeed to believe it’s him.
The presenter in question has been suspended.
Usual presenter of 10 pm News has been absent this week
Usual presenter of 10 pm News has been absent this week
You could say the same about Charlie on the bbc morning news
"Jeremy Vine said the unnamed BBC presenter at the centre of the explicit photos scandal will be thinking it is “game over” if he is named.
Speaking on his Channel 5 show, Vine said: “I think the most famous people are the most vulnerable. And this person, when their name is revealed as it surely will be, everyone is going to say the same thing: how the hell did they think they could get away with this?
“He’s looking at Schofield, probably, and thinking what happened to Schofield - once you let air in, once you become the named person, it’s game over.
“I do know him and I think if he’s described now as angry by one of his friends, I think he believes there’s a fightback to be had here.”
A BBC civil war over the presenter at the centre of claims about his private life escalated after colleagues backed Jeremy Vine’s calls for the figure to name himself.
Vine said the presenter should allow himself to be named to help limit the reputational damage being suffered by the BBC.
BBC staffers, frustrated at being unable to report the high-profile figure’s identity and critical of the corporation bosses’ handling of the affair, told i that they welcomed Vine’s intervention.
“He is speaking for a lot of us when he says the presenter must come forward because the situation is causing deep damage to the BBC,” one said. “It’s an unsustainable position and each day we are getting bombarded with new revelations. The mood is grim.”
Vine said the allegations had reached a “dangerous point” for the well-known figure, who was taken off air and suspended last week.
“Look at the damage to the BBC, look at the damage to his friends,” Vine said on his Channel 5 show. He said the presenter should “show some degree of concern” for colleagues who have been falsely accused by coming forward.
The presenter “wants to be anonymous for as long as possible, hoping that he can one day walk it back into the building”, Vine suggested.
“It’s his decision but he needs to come forward now I think.”
Speaking on his Channel 5 show, Vine said: “I think the most famous people are the most vulnerable. And this person, when their name is revealed as it surely will be, everyone is going to say the same thing: how the hell did they think they could get away with this?
“He’s looking at Schofield, probably, and thinking what happened to Schofield - once you let air in, once you become the named person, it’s game over.
“I do know him and I think if he’s described now as angry by one of his friends, I think he believes there’s a fightback to be had here.”
A BBC civil war over the presenter at the centre of claims about his private life escalated after colleagues backed Jeremy Vine’s calls for the figure to name himself.
Vine said the presenter should allow himself to be named to help limit the reputational damage being suffered by the BBC.
BBC staffers, frustrated at being unable to report the high-profile figure’s identity and critical of the corporation bosses’ handling of the affair, told i that they welcomed Vine’s intervention.
“He is speaking for a lot of us when he says the presenter must come forward because the situation is causing deep damage to the BBC,” one said. “It’s an unsustainable position and each day we are getting bombarded with new revelations. The mood is grim.”
Vine said the allegations had reached a “dangerous point” for the well-known figure, who was taken off air and suspended last week.
“Look at the damage to the BBC, look at the damage to his friends,” Vine said on his Channel 5 show. He said the presenter should “show some degree of concern” for colleagues who have been falsely accused by coming forward.
The presenter “wants to be anonymous for as long as possible, hoping that he can one day walk it back into the building”, Vine suggested.
“It’s his decision but he needs to come forward now I think.”
Richard Bacon saw Vines tweet and hit back: “Stop it. You’re more emotionally intelligent than this. We don’t know the complexities of what his family are going through. Or what dark thoughts are running through his head,”
“Irrespective of what he’s done wrong. You can walk off people wrongly guessing it’s you for 5 minutes.”
“Irrespective of what he’s done wrong. You can walk off people wrongly guessing it’s you for 5 minutes.”
As long as nothing unlawful has been committed and the young person was not underaged then I cannot side with Mr Vine calling the presenter to self-identify for obvious reasons. Unless Mr Vine knows more than what's been reported ie inside info thor' contact with BBC senior management it's not Mr Vine's role/responsibility to out this person publicly; his "suffering" amounts to little (now) as he's not off-air unexpectedly. If Mr Vines wants to out this presenter and opens himself to liable he'd do so. But, what Mr Vine's doing is not helpful, but solely with self interest or possibly harbouring a grievance after the suspended presenter..
The suspended presenter is not Saville or Mr Glitter.
The suspended presenter is not Saville or Mr Glitter.
The old adage of reaping what you sow seems appropriate regardless of who the offender is and I use the word offender advisedly as imo the majority will be offended not least the licence payers who pay the wages of these people.
Ironically I sent an email on behalf of one of my tenants regarding receipt of letters threatening her that she was behind in her payments by £16 for her licence and that it was a Criminal Offence to watch TV without a valid licence.The essence of my email was to ask why her licence fees were being used/wasted to pay the freaks the BBC employ,dated 3 months ago.
Seemingly justified,again?
Ironically I sent an email on behalf of one of my tenants regarding receipt of letters threatening her that she was behind in her payments by £16 for her licence and that it was a Criminal Offence to watch TV without a valid licence.The essence of my email was to ask why her licence fees were being used/wasted to pay the freaks the BBC employ,dated 3 months ago.
Seemingly justified,again?
Detectives the from Met.say no criniminal offences committed and no further action.
Met detectives say no criminal offences committed and no further action.
For your own protection I have *REPORTED* several members on this thread.
Thank me later.
I thank you.
Thank me later.
I thank you.
Given recent Met reputation sparrow would you trust them to detect a custard cream in a tin full of Bourbons?
Should have said btw,the lady was £16 behind on payments for next years licence and I did use the words "Freaks employed by you".
Should have said btw,the lady was £16 behind on payments for next years licence and I did use the words "Freaks employed by you".
The WIFE - has Announced who it is ...
- Huw Edwards.
- as per expectations.
- Huw Edwards.
- as per expectations.
Huw Edwards is currently an 'In-Patient' in Hospital - suffering from Severe Depression.
Not to make light of that ... But that was surely a 1.01.
Not to make light of that ... But that was surely a 1.01.
The modern excuse for being caught being a deviant and deceiving others?
How sad to think he presents the remembrance evening at the royal Albert hall of all those heroes.
I think hes mistakenly confused feelings of huge guilt with mental health issues.
Look on the bright side,most of the sheep of his childhood are now unremembered roast dinners!!
Well said Facts,stick to those using it as an excuse for being caught!!
Well phook my boots
I remember a few years ago all the talk was about how well he looked and how well the moisturising was going etc
Clearly went to his head, think they used to call this a midlife crisis, now it’s mental illness.
I remember a few years ago all the talk was about how well he looked and how well the moisturising was going etc
Clearly went to his head, think they used to call this a midlife crisis, now it’s mental illness.
Facts 12 Jul 23 18:15
He has history of depression.
Don't belittle mental health.
----------------
But - It has Not stopped him earnings £ Millions of Licence Payers Money, though ... has it.
He has history of depression.
Don't belittle mental health.
----------------
But - It has Not stopped him earnings £ Millions of Licence Payers Money, though ... has it.
Dusty,this is only scratching the surface,deviation like this does not suddenly happen.There was a good reason the Military had the rules they had and changed because of what has happened here,the only question is when did the deception/deviation start?
1.01 When he was a boy!!!
1.01 When he was a boy!!!
Don’t let him get away with this.
He trying to pull the Vito from Sopranos ie getting a note from his Doctor
https://youtu.be/xyne501PXAI
He trying to pull the Vito from Sopranos ie getting a note from his Doctor
https://youtu.be/xyne501PXAI
dusty&nasty about the only 2 people "rocked&shocked" by the confirmation. But it must be understood that nothing will come of hounding the man. He's paid/paying the price with job/family etc.. it should be left in god's hands now.
Mental Health is not something to make light of, but the jokes are going to come thick and fast nevertheless.. His wife and children are in an awful position and it is them I feel sorry for. He will have to take his medicine. Hell on Earth you might say.
maybe should have went with "it couldn't be me, i cannot physically sweat" ...
WTF is mental health being trotted out for a lying, deceitful despicable individual? It is an insult to those who suffer for whatever reason they are inflicted?
He is typical of the reason why white,male hetero men feel they are a minority in this century,being bent and hiding it from friends and family,never mind millions of licence payers goes against the grain of decency but usually portrayed as "Normal" by UK TV broadcasters?
He is typical of the reason why white,male hetero men feel they are a minority in this century,being bent and hiding it from friends and family,never mind millions of licence payers goes against the grain of decency but usually portrayed as "Normal" by UK TV broadcasters?
why are people (men) accused of rape named.
when in many cases they are completely innocent ??
how does that effect them ??
when in many cases they are completely innocent ??
how does that effect them ??
Pro sniper
Shocked yes as I said earlier he would have been any price with me
Rocked not in the slightest
Good luck
Shocked yes as I said earlier he would have been any price with me
Rocked not in the slightest
Good luck
Nice to see there is absolutely no homophobia on this Forum.
Good to know you're 'stable', jimmy 
The next scandal I'll bet your 
face is more 
The next scandal I'll bet your face is more
Why would you worry about the lack of fear of an uphill gardener SS? Would you worry the same about an exposed spider?
maybe he identifies as jimmy saville, not his fault then.
Any of you willing to lay odds he was NOT a **** deviant before he got married?
Obviously not got a Joint-Account with the the wife ...
- as you would think she would notice £35,000 going AWOL.
----------
On reflection, though - She does NOT call herself - MRS EDWARDS ... but - Vicky Flind
- makes you wonder how long she may have known.
Name Change - Not necessary for the Divorce ... Puts her in Pole Position on the Grid.
- as you would think she would notice £35,000 going AWOL.
----------
On reflection, though - She does NOT call herself - MRS EDWARDS ... but - Vicky Flind
- makes you wonder how long she may have known.
Name Change - Not necessary for the Divorce
... Puts her in Pole Position on the Grid.
I wonder when the dust eventually settles on all this, if the mother of the then 17 year old might be in deep trouble as it may eventually come out that she was in fact a gold digger. I mean, why should she care if she's ruined a famous person's life, as long as she gets her money! As of at the moment, the police haven't discovered anything that Edwards has done that has broken the law.
mokegibboni 12 Jul 23 20:04
I wonder when the dust eventually settles on all this, if the mother of the then 17 year old might be in deep trouble as it may eventually come out that she was in fact a gold digger. I mean, why should she care if she's ruined a famous person's life, as long as she gets her money!
----------------
May I refer you, and others, to my Posts - of 3 days ago
onlooker 10 Jul 23 20:01
Reports keep referring to - "the boy's FAMILY" ... Yet ...
There is No mention whatsoever of the boy's Father ....
It is all - "the boy's MOTHER."
---------
I would imagine that - The Sun (along with others) are now all avidly 'researching' - "the boy's MOTHER."
--------------------
- and ...
onlooker 11 Jul 23 01:15
I am not all enthused, nor convinced, by the MOTHER's enthusiastic pursuit, here.
She is reportedly ESTRANGED from the son - obviously separated or more likely, DIVORCED from the FATHER - as there is a silent Step-Father.
Just what is in this for the MOTHER? - and WHY ? .... except, of course, a big bung from The Sun.
This could all 'turn turtle' - if she has any 'Previous' - which will - surely - come out, now.
BOTH Parties may well end up hoping for a 0-0 Draw.
-----------
What Price was the DRAW .... Anybody know?
I wonder when the dust eventually settles on all this, if the mother of the then 17 year old might be in deep trouble as it may eventually come out that she was in fact a gold digger. I mean, why should she care if she's ruined a famous person's life, as long as she gets her money!
----------------
May I refer you, and others, to my Posts - of 3 days ago
onlooker 10 Jul 23 20:01
Reports keep referring to - "the boy's FAMILY" ... Yet ...
There is No mention whatsoever of the boy's Father ....
It is all - "the boy's MOTHER."
---------
I would imagine that - The Sun (along with others) are now all avidly 'researching' - "the boy's MOTHER."
--------------------
- and ...
onlooker 11 Jul 23 01:15
I am not all enthused, nor convinced, by the MOTHER's enthusiastic pursuit, here.
She is reportedly ESTRANGED from the son - obviously separated or more likely, DIVORCED from the FATHER - as there is a silent Step-Father.
Just what is in this for the MOTHER? - and WHY ? .... except, of course, a big bung from The Sun.
This could all 'turn turtle' - if she has any 'Previous' - which will - surely - come out, now.
BOTH Parties may well end up hoping for a 0-0 Draw.
-----------
What Price was the DRAW .... Anybody know?
Think he might have ruined his own life. No help from the mother needed.
Police investigated, and no criminal offence committed. Mr Edwards has a history of depression and mental health. I think the public ought to exercise a bit of emotional judgement, and let the matter rest esp if the Police found no criminal offence committed; the young adult not instigating charges. As for the youngster's mum I think she'd be best advised to "keep it within the family" and not shared it with The SUN.
More to come The Sun will be meeting with the BBC to hand over further Claims
What's happened to the other guy that made claims about him?
WTF is mental health being trotted out for a lying, deceitful despicable individual?
Out of interest can you name the occasions he has been any of those things to do with this case? Or Is it that you hadn't clocked he was gay and are hurt that your gaydar is off?
Would it all be ok if it was a 17yo girl - bearing in mind the Sun used many pics of 16 and 17yo girls t1ts for years? Countdown to Charlotte Church's 16th birthday anyone? At least your generation knew how to exploit youngsters for sex and get away with it selling millions of papers - I wander how many those readers are now 'deviant, deceitful, despicable pedophiles?
Out of interest can you name the occasions he has been any of those things to do with this case? Or Is it that you hadn't clocked he was gay and are hurt that your gaydar is off?
Would it all be ok if it was a 17yo girl - bearing in mind the Sun used many pics of 16 and 17yo girls t1ts for years? Countdown to Charlotte Church's 16th birthday anyone? At least your generation knew how to exploit youngsters for sex and get away with it selling millions of papers - I wander how many those readers are now 'deviant, deceitful, despicable pedophiles?
WTF is mental health being trotted out for a lying, deceitful despicable individual?
Out of interest can you name the occasions he has been any of those things to do with this case?
............................
Try asking his wife.
Out of interest can you name the occasions he has been any of those things to do with this case?
............................
Try asking his wife.
It probably happened so many times this latest incident was just a completely normal day for her.
She’s a victim as well. Must’ve been hard having to accept what your husband actually is when he he’s the one providing everything.
She’s a victim as well. Must’ve been hard having to accept what your husband actually is when he he’s the one providing everything.
There’s a case right now going off in Japan.
Some famous bloke off the tv had a wife and child
He decides he’s a woman, dresses as such calls him/her self ‘them’
Over here the mob would be waiting with brickbats for the wife if she doesn’t totally accept the new situation
Over there the public are different and wouldn’t have it, the tv personality killed themself (themself actually works there)
Obv the mob will make out it’s a lack of empathy why them killled them.
In my estimation it’s misdiagnosed mania, in 20 years perhaps there will be tablets and a short stay in a mental shop?
Some famous bloke off the tv had a wife and child
He decides he’s a woman, dresses as such calls him/her self ‘them’
Over here the mob would be waiting with brickbats for the wife if she doesn’t totally accept the new situation
Over there the public are different and wouldn’t have it, the tv personality killed themself (themself actually works there)
Obv the mob will make out it’s a lack of empathy why them killled them.
In my estimation it’s misdiagnosed mania, in 20 years perhaps there will be tablets and a short stay in a mental shop?
It looks as though Julian Clary was correct when he claimed that his pianist the lovely Russell and Judith Chalmers were the only two straight people still working in British television.
Captain Underpants back in the soup.
doity bar****
Former BBC News presenter Huw Edwards has been charged with three counts of making indecent images of children.
The offences are alleged to have taken place between 2020 and 2022 and relate to 37 images that were shared on a WhatsApp chat, according to the Metropolitan Police.
The broadcaster was arrested last November and charged last month, the force revealed on Monday.
He is due to appear in court in London on Wednesday.
A Metropolitan Police spokesperson said: “Huw Edwards, 62, of Southwark, London has been charged with three counts of making indecent images of children following a Met Police investigation.
“The offences, which are alleged to have taken place between December 2020 and April 2022, relate to images shared on a WhatsApp chat.
“Edwards was arrested on 8 November 2023. He was charged on Wednesday, 26 June following authorisation from the Crown Prosecution Service.
“He has been bailed to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, 31 July.
“Media and the public are strongly reminded that this is an active case. Nothing should be published, including on social media, which could prejudice future court proceedings.”
Mr Edwards is accused of having six category A images, the most serious classification of indecent images, on a phone. He is also accused of having 12 category B pictures and 19 category C photographs.
A conviction at Crown Court could lead to a prison sentence of up to 10 years.
Mr Edwards left the BBC in April.
He was previously the corporation’s most high-profile and best-paid news anchor, one of the main presenters on BBC One's Ten O'Clock News, and was often chosen to front coverage of major national events.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgr49q591go
doity bar****
Former BBC News presenter Huw Edwards has been charged with three counts of making indecent images of children.
The offences are alleged to have taken place between 2020 and 2022 and relate to 37 images that were shared on a WhatsApp chat, according to the Metropolitan Police.
The broadcaster was arrested last November and charged last month, the force revealed on Monday.
He is due to appear in court in London on Wednesday.
A Metropolitan Police spokesperson said: “Huw Edwards, 62, of Southwark, London has been charged with three counts of making indecent images of children following a Met Police investigation.
“The offences, which are alleged to have taken place between December 2020 and April 2022, relate to images shared on a WhatsApp chat.
“Edwards was arrested on 8 November 2023. He was charged on Wednesday, 26 June following authorisation from the Crown Prosecution Service.
“He has been bailed to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, 31 July.
“Media and the public are strongly reminded that this is an active case. Nothing should be published, including on social media, which could prejudice future court proceedings.”
Mr Edwards is accused of having six category A images, the most serious classification of indecent images, on a phone. He is also accused of having 12 category B pictures and 19 category C photographs.
A conviction at Crown Court could lead to a prison sentence of up to 10 years.
Mr Edwards left the BBC in April.
He was previously the corporation’s most high-profile and best-paid news anchor, one of the main presenters on BBC One's Ten O'Clock News, and was often chosen to front coverage of major national events.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgr49q591go
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539