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

that’s exactly what I’m saying.

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?

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

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

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.

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

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 ?

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.

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 ....

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

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.

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 !

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.