Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)

[Eds]

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Bloke sounds like The Wealdstone Raider

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Reporter inception.

Soon we’ll have social media warriors shouting at other social media warriors shouting at reporters.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Can we see the clip where she said the children were taking part in porn? out of interest.

 

[domalino]

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)

Or if he’d gotten an unduly lenient sentence then CPS would appeal (and win).

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

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)

Someone needs to look at the guidelines then and change them, because at present it is simply giving beasts who indulge in this filth the green light, with a relative slap on the wrist as a punishment.

 

[Blue Mist]

Someone needs to look at the guidelines then and change them, because at present it is simply giving beasts who indulge in this filth the green light, with a relative slap on the wrist as a punishment.

That I fully accept. It was stated that one of the videos he saw was of a 7yr old. The child could not in any way legally consent, it is therefore rape. When Edward's pays to view the rape he is ensuring more innocent children will be raped. If the guidelines say 6 months suspended is correct, someone needs, urgently to look at the guidelines.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

BBC are shit.

 

[Cheadle_hulmeBlue]

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/19/protest-democracy-labour-tories-laws

Obviously it’s on a case by case basis, but 4 or 5 years for attending a zoom call, to plan something. (You could argue for some jail time in this case)

Vs

Huw Edward’s - a child abuser who gets a suspended sentence. They’ve thrown the book at others, yet somehow if you admit your guilt, you’re a celebrity and say you want rehabilitation you can get away with being a nonce.

The guidelines clearly need to change, as this isn’t right.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

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.

He was asked do you want some images of an underage kid getting abused and his answer was yes ffs. If that isn't Edwards asking for or soliciting for pictures then I don't know what is