Huw Edwards #14

[House of Tea]

So if found guilty he faces a 6 month jail sentence or an unlimited fine. He will have zero trouble paying that unlimited fine - we are all paying it for him. The sick beast.

 

[lookatmekimmy]

His Wikipedia page doesn’t mention him being a teacher does mention his bouts of depression tho
Has his wife left him yet?

 

[LaraQ]

His wife and kids must feel sick.

 

[laughing]

 

[House of Tea]

His Wikipedia page doesn’t mention him being a teacher does mention his bouts of depression tho
Has his wife left him yet?

bleeping hope so.

 

[Piff paff puff]

My TV is visible through the window! I rarely watch BBC, but do you still have to pay if you watch C4/ITV. Probably a daft question, but someone's reply earlier confused me. I thought you only paid if you watched the BBC.

From BBC TV licence website

Yes, you need a TV Licence to watch live on any channel, pay TV service or streaming service. This includes recording and downloading. On any device. It doesn't matter if you receive it over the internet, from a cable or satellite provider or through an aerial.

 

[bananabutter]

bleeping hope so.

Disgusting if she hasn’t. How can she sleep next to him

 

[Limey]

His wife and kids must feel sick.

His wife seemed to be standing by him, at least initially. It does put me in mind of this article that appeared in the Guardian this weekend.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.the...024/jul/27/husband-viewing-child-abuse-images

Some people will tie themselves in knots to justify family members' offending - the wife in this article claiming they were both 'secondary victims', no, your husband is a criminal.

 

[Traazers]

My TV is visible through the window! I rarely watch BBC, but do you still have to pay if you watch C4/ITV. Probably a daft question, but someone's reply earlier confused me. I thought you only paid if you watched the BBC.

If you're watching live, yes:

If you watch TV as it's being broadcast you need a TV licence
If you watch or record shows as they're being shown on telly in the UK ('live TV'), you need to be covered by a TV licence. You also need one if you use BBC iPlayer.

Do I need a TV licence?

If you watch 'live' TV, you need a TV licence; there's no avoiding it. But if you watch catch-up without using BBC iPlayer, you could ditch it & save £100s.

www.moneysavingexpert.com

 

[lookatmekimmy]

Tabloid rush to judgment on Huw Edwards condemned as prayers urged for church-going BBC newsreader - Premier Christian News | Headlines, Breaking News, Comment & Analysis

Following the naming of BBC News presenter, Huw Edwards, as the man at the centre of tabloid allegations about payments for explicit images, media commentators

premierchristian.news

Be interested to see how the church responds now.

 

[Shesaidwhat?]

His wife seemed to be standing by him, at least initially. It does put me in mind of this article that appeared in the Guardian this weekend.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.the...024/jul/27/husband-viewing-child-abuse-images

Some people will tie themselves in knots to justify family members' offending - the wife in this article claiming they were both 'secondary victims', no, your husband is a criminal.

I read that article. What jumped out at me was she says the marriage is stronger than ever yet she’s put a camera in her son’s room as she doesn’t trust him 100% around him. Surely when you get to that stage the logical option is to leave him.

 

[bananabutter]

If you're watching live, yes:

If you watch TV as it's being broadcast you need a TV licence
If you watch or record shows as they're being shown on telly in the UK ('live TV'), you need to be covered by a TV licence. You also need one if you use BBC iPlayer.

Do I need a TV licence?

If you watch 'live' TV, you need a TV licence; there's no avoiding it. But if you watch catch-up without using BBC iPlayer, you could ditch it & save £100s.

www.moneysavingexpert.com

I’m tempted to cancel mine right now it infuriates me time and time again the same old story with the BBC!!

 

[Limey]

I read that article. What jumped out at me was she says the marriage is stronger than ever yet she’s put a camera in her son’s room as she doesn’t trust him 100% around him. Surely when you get to that stage the logical option is to leave him.

Also, she works in safeguarding, and he's changed his name to avoid identification in the future.

I cannot believe someone thought that it was a good idea to publish it, but the Guardian stopped being a serious newspaper a long time ago.

 

[curious.alice]

In plain sight? I dunno. Just hope it links

CBBC Newsround | The Team | The Team | All about Huw

He was a teacher?? Oh god

 

[Grifty Mc]

His wife seemed to be standing by him, at least initially. It does put me in mind of this article that appeared in the Guardian this weekend.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.the...024/jul/27/husband-viewing-child-abuse-images

Some people will tie themselves in knots to justify family members' offending - the wife in this article claiming they were both 'secondary victims', no, your husband is a criminal.

bleeping hell the guardian should be ashamed of themselves with that article.

 

[tuberculosis]

His wife seemed to be standing by him, at least initially. It does put me in mind of this article that appeared in the Guardian this weekend.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.the...024/jul/27/husband-viewing-child-abuse-images

Some people will tie themselves in knots to justify family members' offending - the wife in this article claiming they were both 'secondary victims', no, your husband is a criminal.

This article has made me so angry - although he's saying some of the right things, he's mostly playing the victim. The police made you tell your wife - which was "a nice twist of the knife"? Even then, you used "they think I" - distancing yourself from your actions, not taking any responsibility.

Hard not to just decide I hate men.

 

[carmencarmen]

So if found guilty he faces a 6 month jail sentence or an unlimited fine. He will have zero trouble paying that unlimited fine - we are all paying it for him. The sick beast.

Six months is an insult

 

[Okivia2020]

bleeping hell the guardian should be ashamed of themselves with that article.

That’s really disturbed me reading that. It’s scary to think that you really don’t know people and these people are maybe living down our road, saying hello to our kids, working with kids (urgh makes me just doubt the world)

 

[Millennial Pink]

His wife seemed to be standing by him, at least initially. It does put me in mind of this article that appeared in the Guardian this weekend.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.the...024/jul/27/husband-viewing-child-abuse-images

Some people will tie themselves in knots to justify family members' offending - the wife in this article claiming they were both 'secondary victims', no, your husband is a criminal.

I'm at a loss to figure out why she's staying with him. No money, no sex life, the background fear of him harming your son, the worry of being discovered. What's in it for them?

Next to no responsibility taken by him, disgraceful.

 

[Helena-botham-farter]

I was just about to ask if the tracker thing was a myth. If you already have the iPlayer can you delete it then? Or just not watch live tv?

I don't think watching Iplayer will catch you out in any way. I've not paid a TV license for over 20 years, I occasionally watch something on Iplayer, maybe once or twice a year.
The BBC use a private company ( Capita, also the bastards who deny disabled people benefits) to try and enforce licences. So they're not likely to have access to who's logging onto Iplayer.
They also rely a lot on threatening letters but hardly ever send anyone out. I don't think I ever had anyone come round despite letters every single month for over 20 years!
---