I don't really have much sympathy for either of them - at the end of the day they both KNOWINGLY did what anybody with even half a brain would know was stupid - and both got their bum bit - possibly both figuratively and literally!
They both had a huge amount to lose and knowingly hurt the ones they love (or at least should care about) and both presumably thinking someone thirty or forty years younger than themselves loved them for themself - and not their money!
There's no fool like an old fool they say and both have been incredibly stupid and quite frankly got what they deserved
The ones who suffered in all this was Edwards family and Schofield's ex-wife.
They are the victims here not Schofield and Edwards they brought it upon themselves.
Sluffy wrote:I don't really have much sympathy for either of them - at the end of the day they both KNOWINGLY did what anybody with even half a brain would know was stupid - and both got their bum bit - possibly both figuratively and literally!
They both had a huge amount to lose and knowingly hurt the ones they love (or at least should care about) and both presumably thinking someone thirty or forty years younger than themselves loved them for themself - and not their money!
There's no fool like an old fool they say and both have been incredibly stupid and quite frankly got what they deserved
The ones who suffered in all this was Edwards family and Schofield's ex-wife.
They are the victims here not Schofield and Edwards they brought it upon themselves.
I quite agree Sluffy but I very much doubt that we have heard the whole story and possibly never will. One thing I know from my own experience is that when you discover something in public life that is seriously wrong, in all probability you will only have scratched the surface and will get nowhere until the media decide to take an interest. That in itself is one hell of a hurdle.
The purple-faced, leftyspecs simpletons were out in force last night spouting their outrage at The Sun and concluding that it should now be left to the BBC to 'investigate' the Edwards affair.
Have we seen 'all accounts', Boncey? I very much doubt it.
I believe that the parents went to The Sun because they believed the evidence was there but the responsible authorities didn't want to get involved. Its a tough position to find yourself in.
P.S. I expect they went to other newspapers too but only The Sun was willing to shine a light into this murky business.
Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Thu 13 Jul - 9:04; edited 1 time in total
Have we seen 'all accounts', Boncey? I very much doubt it.
I believe that the parents went to The Sun because they believed the evidence was there but the responsible authorities didn't want to get involved. Its a tough position to find yourself in.
P.S. I expect they went to other newspapers too but only The Sun was willing to shine a light into this murky business.
My guess is that the 'youth' put himself on Tinder and Edwards contacted him.
I don't know the protocol for how these things go but I assume they sooner or later got around to swapping pictures - maybe the one above (if it is genuine) from Edwards and probably dick pics too.
Clearly the 'youth' got to know who Edwards really was in real life.
Now we get to the point where Edwards started handing over money - why?
There is no claim that they actually ever met (although there is a claim that he broke Covid lockdown to see someone else) so why did the youth end up with £35k if he actually did?
I can only think of 3 reasons.
Either he was totally besotted and could only live by having contact somehow with the youth even if it was by never being with him in person. Or he's been 'catfished' and the youth span him a story about needing money, or it was blackmail.
Whatever it was Edwards was stupid and quite frankly has ruined his life and those of his wife and five children who have to live with the shame and financial loss of his earnings from now on for the rest of their lives. No doubt even his grandchildren (or future grandchildren will be embarrassed and ridiculed by their mates when they ever got to find out about this!
And all for what...?
I feel sorry for him if he was/is a repressed homosexual but I'm sure there must be more secure ways of 'scratching his itch' than asking for dick pics from some randoms off social media sites?
As for the Sun, it looks as though they ran with a story without checking it out thoroughly first - a bit like the Cliff Richard house raid - the assumption being something like 'he's gay, so the story must be true'.
It wasn't in Cliff's case and it is looking like it wasn't in this case too.
As for the parents my guess is that the 'youth' spun them a story that he'd been groomed and had to sell dick pics to fund his habit.
I think it is likely that it was more the other way around where the 'youth' 'exploited' Edwards and the money (used to buy drugs) was paid to him to keep him 'sweet'.
What an utter mess for everyone and all because Edwards apparently wanted a wank!
As for the Sun, it looks as though they ran with a story without checking it out thoroughly first - a bit like the Cliff Richard house raid .
I am not sure I believe that Sluffy. I expect The Sun made a lot of inquiries before they dared publish anything and they are claiming they have a lot that they haven't published.
There plainly were strong concerns at the BBC too or BWFC fan, Victoria Derbyshire, would not have been conducting completely separate investigations into Edwards' conduct for Newsnight.
As for the police, what did their inquiries amount to? Did they interview Edwards or the vulnerable lad in question? Did they inquire into when, how or why this alleged £35,000 changed hands? Did they examine bank or phone records to help ascertain who else may have been involved or who was supplying Class A drugs to the lad?
Yet viewed through the Leftyspecs of Messrs Sopel and Maitlis and their ilk there's nowt to see apart from purple-faced outrage at The Sun and now Auntie Beeb herself.
Sluffy wrote:As for the Sun, it looks as though they ran with a story without checking it out thoroughly first - a bit like the Cliff Richard house raid .
I am not sure I believe that Sluffy. I expect The Sun made a lot of inquiries before they dared publish anything and they are claiming they have a lot that they haven't published.
There plainly were strong concerns at the BBC too or BWFC fan, Victoria Derbyshire, would not have been conducting completely separate investigations into Edwards' conduct for Newsnight.
As for the police, what did their inquiries amount to? Did they interview Edwards or the lad in question? Did they inquire into when, how or why this alleged £35,000 changed hands? Did they examine bank or phone records to help ascertain who else may have been involved or who was supplying Class A drugs to the lad?
Yet viewed through the Leftyspecs of Messrs Sopel and Maitlis and their ilk there's nowt to see apart from purple-faced outrage at The Sun and now Auntie Beeb herself.
Well I can only go off what has been reported and apparently The Sun did not contact the youth prior to publishing, for his side of the story and although they did receive contact from his solicitors before they went to print, stating their client was saying nothing had happened and what they had been told was 'rubbish', still went ahead anyway without including in their article the youth's denial?
Why not, it would have been the right thing to do?
I don't have lefty or righty specs but that sounds to me as though The Sun either didn't do a full a 'due diligence' of the story before they printed their article - or that they've been purposely manipulative in someway, for whatever reason?
I don't doubt Edwards has been up to things that he (and the BBC no doubt) would rather have not been reported in the press but up to now at least he doesn't seem to have done anything illegal (or maybe nothing that most others haven't done - I'm thinking about breaking Covid rules if he actually did?).
Did he send creepy texts to some young BBC staff, allegedly he did, but that's an internal disciplinary action if he had - I don't think there was a major BBC cover up if that's what is being seen as the issue here?
Will other things crawl out of the woodwork, who knows - but at this point it seems to me that he's been simply a stupid old man who has thrown his reputation, career and family away because he didn't come out as gay before he started seeking dick pics on Tinder.
Christ there are enough well known gay and lesbians working for the BBC, so his sexuality shouldn't have been an issue to anyone, nor harmed his career.
He has acted pervy, I strongly suspect he's been blackmailed and he's paid a heavy price with his health for hiding his sexuality - even in this day and age.
Has anyone even been shocked at him being revealed as gay?
He's brought this on himself, so I have no sympathy for him, although I wouldn't have wished a breakdown on him or anyone else.
The Sun to my mind has not acted impartially in how they've reported this, was there as some claimed an attack on the BBC through The Sun's story, I don't know, they certainly seemed to be backtracking from how they reported it on the first day.
If you believe The Sun has reported everything as it should that's fine, I'm not looking to change your mind, I simply take the view it hasn't and even previous Sun editors have expressed this view too -
As for the parents and the article you linked to...
There is a poster (Not in Crawley) on ww who is in the arts and entertainment business who posted that the parents would do 'very well' out of all this, even though The Sun had reported the parents did not want paying for anything and only wanted to protect their child... https://www.wanderersways.com/forum/topic/101165-phillip-schofield/page/9/#comment-2482703
Well todays news is...
Parents in Huw Edwards case ‘offered tens of thousands for TalkTV interview’
I don't know how genuine the parents were, or if The Sun had somehow manipulated them, or they The Sun, but the longer this has gone on the stronger the 'bad smell' of it all has got to me.
I've no idea of what really has gone on throughout but I believe Edwards has been a fool, that I strongly suspect he's been blackmailed or played in someway and that The Sun has exploited the story for benefits beyond what a paper normally would.
I think probably the best thing to do would to let the story drop now and see what the BBC inquiry will reveal if anything but clearly the Murdock companies are intent on pushing it further - even though The Sun has supposedly said they won't progress things anymore.
As you know I like my sayings and this probably is the most appropriate in this case...
The first thing I’d say is, who’s actually confirmed the 17 year old was male, or even the others involved, I’ve not seen that clarified anywhere. Equally Edwards has been accused of sending inappropriate messages within the BBC expressing how attractive they looked. That sounds more like the kind of thing you’d send to a female than a male, or could it be a mixture of both. I don’t think there’s any question the messages were sent as copies exist. The only fact is, we don’t know, we don’t so far have any proof in the public domain which I believe, like the police withdrawal, is down to Edwards mental health problems rather than letting things rest. I believe once he’s out of hospital investigations will resume and as usual with these things what we know so far is just the tip of the iceberg.
What I don’t accept is that this is just a private matter and should now be left to rest. You hit the button in your original title Sluffy, Edwards is a pervert and has shown his public face to be just a charade. Even if he hasn’t broken the law, a person in his position on National TV should not be allowed to continue to deliver news events in such a prominent role. Clearly something wasn’t right internally if certain colleagues within the BBC were investigating him themselves completely separate from the Sun so leave off the Murdoch bashing. I can’t believe for one minute that the Sun didn’t receive proof from the parents but likewise are keeping them back until the sympathy (sickening) for Edwards subsides upon which they will hopefully prove their point. As for that Pie crap, nobody’s concerned about Edwards wanting a wank or looking at porn, it’s consciously involving others in his perversion and once someone starts down that road who knows where it can end?
See post 7 of this thread - The Metro talks about the youth as a male on its front page - I'm guessing it was a first edition mistake by them and should not have mention a 'him' or 'her' and kept the sex unknown but it was posted up with all the other newspapers front pages on the BBC's first edition feature of that days papers.
When I said let it rest, I meant the papers, not Edwards returning to read the news - his career has effectively ended now.
The police have not been provided with any evidence by the parents or the Sun that anything illegal had taken place AND the youth denies anything happened at all! That's why the police are taking no action and not because Edwards is ill. There simply is nothing for them to investigate for criminality.
The BBC have been investigating him since the parents called into the BBC Wales centre to lodge their original complaint - clearly it was/is about his behaviour (contacting young men) and whether that was in someway going to bring disrepute on the company (BBC) - it is common procedural HR practice in most companies.
As for Murdoch I take what I read in the papers with a pinch of salt.
If you haven't worked it out by now, there are only a few of the papers that don't have a political or social bias and the rest are targeted at specific sections of our society for them to avidly consume.
And as for the parents, we know nothing about them other than how The Sun portrays them to us.
And they only have their son's story as to what they believe has happened - a well known 'celeb' (if you will) has given him £35k for some dick pics - does that sound believable to you, or does blackmailing a dirty old 'celeb' and getting £35k off him to keep quiet sound more believable - because it does to me (not that I count in the scheme of things anyway).
If I was the Sun reporter, or the editor, I wouldn't think the story would have been the same somehow do you?
Innocent boy corrupted by BBC celeb to The nations favourite newsreader Huw Edwards blackmailed and shamed by unscrupulous youth!
Norpig wrote:i love Jonathan Pie and he speaks more sense than you ever will Bob.
OK. I get it. You love potty-mouthed pillocks. I can't say that I'm surprised and there's no law against it that I know of. Maybe its just a matter of taste.
I don't believe everything I read in any newspaper but in a few words, Sluffy, are you trying to say that The Sun is trying to mislead the public and its readers in this case or that they have no right to publish the story because of an association with Rupert Murdoch or for some other reason?
What about Victoria Derbyshire? Would you suggest that she had no right to follow up the concerns that appear to have been brought to her notice? Or is it all just too sordid and should be swept under the carpet because that's what usually happens?
Sluffy, was it a mistake by the metro to indicate the 17 year old was male or was it just based on an assumption? It may well have been just a simple assumption similar to the one you yourself are making rather than being based on evidence seen? I don’t know for sure and nor does I suspect anybody else although if the Sun have spoken to the parents I would have expected they’d know the sex of the individual even if they haven’t printed it.
I tend to agree on the financial aspects of the case though as £35k does seem an extraordinary amount for anyone to pay just for pictures so there could be either a blackmailing effect or possibly a hush money aspect involved. I understand that there are details of bank transactions between Edwards and the sibling with the parents so surely that can be proved one way or the other. I don’t think this is going to die away quietly and nor should it. Hopefully the internal investigation by Victoria Derbyshire will continue and the results be made public because theres still a need for that, quite apart from the Sun articles, indicates there is a case to answer.
boltonbonce wrote:I'd rather listen to Pie than that bastion of integrity, Rod Liddle, who was spouting off last night about what a great job The Sun had done.
Rod Liddle said The Sun did a great job, did he? If you view it through Leftyspecs that must prove that it didn't. You'll never change will you, Boncey?
Posts : 17854 Join date : 2012-11-30 Age : 53 Location : Burnage, Manchester
As Sun columnist Rod Liddle is brought onto Newsnight to talk about Huw Edwards' alleged behaviour towards young people, here's a reminder of what he's written himself on the subject. pic.twitter.com/eaFwg5rFtJ — Adam Bienkov (@AdamBienkov) July 12, 2023
Home
