Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)

[Centurions]

No-one (I hope). If I understand the poster correctly, he's simply drawing attention to the faux outrage expressed by the hacks working for that disgusting rag (and some on this thread) and the sheer hypocrisy of their position given its morally bankrupt track record.

I'm definitely not but I don't see why people are bringing up Sam Fox when that was no less than 40 years ago, probably before half the people who've mentioned her were even born.

 

[KPXBLN]

If that’s the case I’ve no sympathy for either of them but the collateral damage here is a kid who got his hands on a substantial amount of money and developed a very expensive and damaging drug habit, Edwards is an absolute wanker.

You’ve got no sympathy for either of them? What exactly is it you want to punish her for?

 

[Centurions]

It's the world we live in and like it or not there is no moral high ground to be taken. Are unproven rumours about Trump ok to print? What about Partygate? What about Matt Hancock being caught grabbing his girlfriends bum on CCTV? And worst of all, what about the concerted press effort (from all papers) to destroy Jeremy Corbyn? A couple of other points, The Sun did not print 'the name' most of us however went to the trouble to find out 'the name' ourselves so are we worse than the Sun? One final point, in his worst moments Huw Edwards found out who his real friends at the BBC were, "I'm Spartacus" it certainly was NOT. So much for all those internal team building days!

Politicians are public servants and need to be held to account for their words and behaviour. There is no comparison to Huw Edwards.

 

[KPXBLN]

Equally, that's an assumption that the other allegations are going to be unproven. And also that he has paid thousands of pounds expecting just a few Polaroids.

And, yes, as a public figure, even that is always going to attract attention and have consequences, as he is intelligent enough to know. A Councillor, doctor or teacher would also be sacked or have their reputations ruined by being caught in the same position, without the press coverage. Should that just be their family business too?

Obviously yes

 

[Kippaxpete]

I'm definitely not but I don't see why people are bringing up Sam Fox when that was no less than 40 years ago, probably before half the people who've mentioned her were even born.

I take your point but, aside from dispensing with 'page three', does anyone genuinely believe that the Sun is still nothing but a journalistic cess pit?

 

[Phil1]

Far too many busy cunts, needy cunts and curtain twitchers in the world today.
Mind your business and crack on with your lives instead of revelling and opining in others misery. What folk get up to in their own time in their own homes has fuck all to do with anybody else other than his family and friends. Especially if it’s legal and above board. The morality police that seem to have become quite the big voice over the last few years are all a bit sad and pathetic.

 

[KPXBLN]

17 year old when it started, technically not a kid ad you say but how would he have known? Could have been 15, don’t think that would have made any difference to Edwards, it’s not like he’d ask for his birth certificate is it?

What are you insinuating?

 

[lazerblue]

I'm angry how common folk get taken in by the likes of The Sun, GB News and all the other scum media.

the common folk! i always wondered what happened to lord charles

 

[tommybooth]

Rags have put in a bid.

 

[meltonblue]

that is the case - the Sun backtracking or otherwise, doesn't change any of that.

It’s indicative of it. Let’s wait and see what happens.