Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)

[Jimmieblue]

Surely there’s no one on here siding with this criminal.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Good overview.

++

The burning question for many tonight is why was Huw Edwards not sent to prison? The simple answer is ... there is no simple and uniform solution for dealing with offenders.

The offence he committed could in theory lead to 10 years in jail.

But, in practice, detailed sentencing guidelines, developed over years of comparing varying cases, save that severe punishment for the worst of the worst people who are producing the images that Williams scooped up and went on to share.

Edwards, by receiving them, was at the bottom of that chain of abuse.

So his sentence was always going to be well short of that maximum 10 years - and, likely to be shorter than the 12 months suspended sentence given to Alex Williams in March.

The guidelines say that for someone in Edwards' position, the starting point is a year in jail with a range of between six months and three years.

Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring began his sentencing calculation with a year. He knocked three months off to take into account the mental health evidence and the fact that this was a first offence. This is absolutely standard procedure.

He then discounted the sentence by a third, bringing it down to six months, to credit the earliest possible guilty plea.

Again, this discount for an admission is a standard feature of sentencing law. It is an offer to focus an offender’s mind on pleading guilty early and accepting their crimes.

It saves a huge amount of public money by not tying up the criminal justice system with a jury trial. And it means, if the offender is willing, they can get on with the long and hard process of rehabilitation as soon as possible.

The next question was whether Edwards needed to be jailed to protect the public. The chief magistrate concluded not, because he accepted evidence that the offender before him had already understood the gravity of what he had done - and was responding to therapy.

And so he moved down a notch from immediate jail to a suspended six month sentence. That means that if Edwards were to commit another offence in the next two years, he would be likely to go to jail immediately. But if he stays on the road to reform, he won't.

The prosecution had argued that Edwards needed to be subject to restrictions on his liberties through a Sexual Harm Prevention Order. That would have allowed agencies to monitor or curtail his communications and movements - including knowing his entire internet history on every device he uses.

The court heard that probation experts had used a "predictor tool" to estimate the likelihood of Edwards reoffending. It had found his risk of indirect internet-based offending - meaning viewing more images - to be medium.

But his lawyers argued that risk was diminishing because he was on the mend and had shown genuine remorse.

The chief magistrate said that it was not necessary to subject Edwards to the additional SHPO conditions, given the progress towards rehabilitation already underway.

Edwards must complete a 40-day Sex Offender Treatment Programme and 25 rehabilitation sessions aimed at helping him to fix his mental health and use of alcohol.

Even if all that is successful, there is a sting in the sentencing tail.

For the next seven years Edwards will be on the sex offender register - meaning he has to keep the police informed of his whereabouts. It will be difficult for him to travel abroad on holiday and some countries may never let him in at all.

He’s free from prison - but he is not free in the true sense of the word. His life choices will be watched on and off for years to come.

 

[domalino]

erm he did though

He did what? We know he didn’t set out specifically looking for indecent images of children, and the magistrate mentioned that in his sentencing notes. He also asked not to be sent anything illegal, but not until after the guy had already sent him a lot and he’d watched it, which the magistrate also noted.

From the perspective of reoffending and danger to the public, I would expect someone who searches out this content on purpose to be much more likely to reoffend than someone who simply accepts them when some other paedo sends them to him.

 

[Kinkybyname]

he said he got no gratification from them, and that he had no memory of looking at the images... if he had no memory of looking at them how does he know he got no gratification from them? Bullshit and lies

 

[Blue Mist]

That’s not true at all though, we know he’s Alex Williams, 25, from Merthyr Tydfil and his photo has been in every newspaper and news channel in the country.

In 6 weeks the average member of the public won’t be able to pick him out of a lineup, but everyone he’s ever known, everyone in his home town etc. will know exactly who he is and what he’s done. In 20 years time anyone he meets will be able to google him and all of these news articles will come up.

If Alex Williams moves from Merther Tydfil he will just be some unknown, unrecognised person. His picture may well have been in the papers but me and many others haven't seen it. Those that have wont remember him in 3 months time . Edward's on the other hand will be recognised partly because the press will follow him. The difference between the two people and the effect that will have is huge.

 

[Cheadle_hulmeBlue]

I agree to an extent. I don’t think he’s got away with it as such, his career and reputation are tarnished and I imagine he’s completely alienated from his family.

I don’t agree with the guidelines either though, however I do acknowledge they’d have had input from people far more knowledgable than me and less emotive. On an emotive scale, it’s hard not to agree with lock them up and throw away the key for any of them.

That’s the minimum of what should happen to him. He’s a child abuser who hasn’t been locked up. To me that’s completely wrong and to an extent he has got away with it. The story almost didn’t get released because of his influence.

There are people who have been locked up for less.

It’s difficult not to be emotive or angry about someone who abuses children and then doesn’t get arrested. The so called guidelines clearly don’t work.

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

The more you read, the more you can see his lawyer has played the courts for fools.

Category A porn, including a 7 year old boy being penetrated. Yet the nonce has no recollection of seeing any of the images, partly due his mental state.

I don’t give a fuck what state of mind someone is in, you would never ever forget that vile image.

Hes got away with one of the most heinous crimes there is. Let’s just hope and pray it breaks that he’s been found dead of his own accord.

 

[BlueHammer85]

James O Brien covering this now on LBC, some good insight and callers coming in.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Surely there’s no one on here siding with this criminal.

I’m pretty sure @LangleyBlue1970 isn’t.

 

[Blue Mist]

The more you read, the more you can see his lawyer has played the courts for fools.

Category A porn, including a 7 year old boy being penetrated. Yet the nonce has no recollection of seeing any of the images, partly due his mental state.

I don’t give a fuck what state of mind someone is in, you would never ever forget that vile image.

Hes got away with one of the most heinous crimes there is. Let’s just hope and pray it breaks that he’s been found dead of his own accord.

The British justice system allows a defence solicitor or barrister to put mitigation to the court before sentence. Just because they do, doesn't mean the magistrate or judge takes a blind bit of notice so, imo the lawyer hasn't played the court for fools.
As others have pointed out, Edward's was sentenced within the guidelines. If he hadn't he'd simply appeal (and win)