Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

BBC Scandal - Huw Edwards formally suspended over payment of explicit images of teenager Read OP*

191012141540

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,146 ✭✭✭✭anewme




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Can you make out the step dads quote? Does it make sense at all about the age this started? It’s a badly written article- I need to read it again to see his point.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    And what age was the son when he tried to arrange a meeting? - he could be anything from 17 to 20 years of age.

    Just read the Sun article - 'The family said they complained to the BBC hours after the presenter tried to meet the youngster at a train station.'

    so he was 20?



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,922 ✭✭✭✭suvigirl


    Says he went to the police in desperation? Surely that's your first port of call!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,146 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    I took it that they went to the bbc after the attempted meeting which was this year?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Yes, so twenty years of age - the Sun is clutching at straws at this stage!

    Even worse, the police had already concluded nothing illegal took place per the Sun's only source:

    'I told the BBC I had gone to the police in desperation but they couldn’t do anything as they said it wasn’t illegal'



  • Posts: 276 ✭✭ Macie Helpful Meteorite


    I think the Sun newspaper has backed the wrong horse here.

    My understanding with 0 proof is that some crackhead had an only fans account and this presenter took a liking to this chap and paid extra for extras.

    A quick Google says you need to be 18 to setup an OF account so the presenter may have been unaware of this chaps real age.

    My gut feeling is that this presenter may have been getting blackmailed.

    I have no idea really.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    This is coming out just now- to date it was BBC then the Sun- not the police.

    However either way it’s a confusing article (The Sun )-step dad says he went to the police but they couldn’t do anything- surely if an alleged crime was reported they would have? Even now, they still haven’t commenced a criminal investigation. Is it because the alleged victim won’t cooperate or is it because legally they need a victim statement before investigating? It’s all rather confusing.

    My guess is they’ll need a statement or a computer to examine- doesn’t look like they’ll get either in the short term



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Because nothing illegal took place - the stepfather's own words of what the police concluded



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Yeah I saw that- but then the step father goes on to say “20, but it was going on for 3 years”- now did he say that to the police or only mention the guy was 20?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Well that would be quite the omission. - not really credible either. Also what evidence did he have of when the photos were taken that he saw. A photo of the presenter in his underwear is quite underwhelming to start with.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,749 ✭✭✭Dave0301


    Oddly enough, it is a discussion forum but you don't seem to be up for one.

    We'll leave it at that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    The official police position right now is:

    The Met does not consider the threshold for a criminal investigation has yet been reached, but in a statement made it clear the force would carry out further work, but falling short of a formal criminal investigation that would give officers powers of arrest and search.

    A police spokesperson said: “They are assessing the information discussed at the meeting and further enquiries are taking place to establish whether there is evidence of a criminal offence being committed. There is no investigation at this time.”

    The statement suggests the police are still at the “scoping” stage of the inquiry, where they do not commit to a particular course of action, but it leaves open the option of launching a full investigation.

    so, not quite an open and shut case- yet, at least



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,853 ✭✭✭StrawbsM


    I’m wondering if the lad has had an only fans account for 3 years and perhaps he received payments from various people during that time

    But the stepdad says they have proof of 2 payments. Would only fans act as an agent? Like, they receive the money from a customer, take their service fee and then pay the balance over to the only fans creator?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    No idea I’m not an only fans fan 😀As the article says above, powers of arrest and search only come when the threshold is reached for a criminal investigation- I wonder in the meantime do “enquires” include access to bank statements to review payments outward to certain individuals 3 years ago ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,957 ✭✭✭kirk.


    I know , your idea of discussion ..

    You: "admit to posting absolute scutter then we can all move on"

    Me: " insert reply here "



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,828 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    They should be - I get the impression this story has spiralled out of their control and not gone in the direction they expected.

    Repeatedly quoting the mother and stepfather (both of whom seem to have a bad relationship with the son) and completely ignoring the strong denials of the young man involved is ridiculous.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,922 ✭✭✭✭suvigirl


    I would love to think that this story would make those people stop and think, the ones that are so quick to judge by social media, but unfortunately it probably wont.

    I hope every single person that named this guy or alluded to him on social media will get a summons for defamation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    I agree ... I have seen several names mentioned ... all who had to come out a deny it was him ... needless to say most people accused will be innocent in cases like this .... people's good name is dragged through the mud ... to save this from happening the actual person should just be named or failing that a list of who it ain't should be released .... when names are kept secret it only fuels this social media speculation ....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,957 ✭✭✭kirk.


    It can also be argued that people like Gary Lineker getting involved in issuing denials is fuelling speculation

    And furthermore they didn't have to issue denials

    They chose to



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Such nonsense - defamation laws are there for a reason. The person subject to these claims shouldn't have to be the sacrificial lamb - he is entitled his good name also



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    Well too many innocent people's good name get tarnished when they are mentioned online ... defamation laws?? aren't they meant to protect people from slander? .... if a person is the subject of an investigation they should be named as the person there are enquiries about ... that is not convicting them .... otherwise it is every name of hundreds of innocent people tried and convicted on social media, in the pub, et al .... defamation laws should protect against that surely !!!!!!!!!!!!!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Talk in some papers this morning of the possibility of the presenter in question being named in parliament - not a good idea in my view. Whilst there MAY be cause for concern about this presenter, due process in terms of a preliminary police investigation, has only commenced- let the police do their job.

    There are no reports about any wider concerns of the presenter - and if there were concerns, you’d bet some tabloid would have run with the story at this stage.

    Jumping the gun when even the police are trying to get their heads around what took place here, is not giving respect to the legal process, in my view.

    Obviously there are challenges- a potential “victim” who refuses to cooperate for whatever reason (a multitude of reasons even) could be one; but equally, there may be just “nothing to see here” - it might be tawdry, unbecoming of a public servant, whatever, but not illegal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,193 ✭✭✭Trigger Happy


    I was thinking the same myself. If the lad was making £1k a month from various people on onlyfans then that would amount to the 35k over three years. But I dont know how onlyfans pay their contributors. Is it a monthly sum or do they get paid everytime someone subscribes?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,385 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Yes. I think so .

    Is it a coincidence that in the midst of all this furore started by The Sun , the Covid WhatsApp messages are due out in the enquiry today ?

    Not here , over there !



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    The amount doesn’t matter- it’s the age the young person received the payments is all that counts- just proof of one payment to the young person in question when he was under 18 should be enough to give the police the reason to up this to a criminal investigation. It’s quite possible the police are already exploring this as part of their enquiries and they’re just keeping quiet about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if they issued a statement soon to say they were upping the investigation level.



  • Posts: 8,532 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Presenter may not have done anything illegal but it's not a good image for him if he was paying some bloke for naughty photos. Has he not heard of the internet FFS.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,754 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Regardless of illegality, I’ve no doubt such behaviour would be against terms of employment - but the BBC apparently did nothing from May until July.

    Given what the mother/step father are saying, Shirley it would have raised alarm bells?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,593 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    And doing it in a way that could be traced back to him... this isn't some random bloke with no public profile... so much to lose from the information coming to light \ open to being blackmailed if someone gets compromising material on him.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,789 ✭✭✭Karppi


    How much has the Sun paid or promised to pay the parents for the "scoop"?



Advertisement