Ssshh, you know Hugh

[Barbe bleu 832]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Carter Ruck are going to do quite nicely out of this😂

The lawyers always do well. Out of anything really.

For me that's maybe the oddest part, how does a 20 year old allegedly addicted to crack and of apparently  means is able to fund lawyers people have heard of.

I think though that their interest in this will now cease. Neither paper, nor BBC will make the celebrity known and I think the kid's identity isn't public so no real possibility of a libel trial

 

[Barbe bleu 832]

2 hours ago, Herman said:

Pointing out Farage was lying when he was clearly lying is not people indulging in their fantasies, ffs. 

No, that part isn't (although he says he now has evidence to substantiate the claim).  That's just doing him a favour and amplifying his voice.

The fantasies are around him being a KGB spy  and arch money launderer and all the other bits that only @loudvoice69 on twitter can expose , rather than a lost aged man struggling to remain relevant (which he is)

Edited July 11, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[Herman 9,821]

How do you spell disingenuous? 

[benchwarmer 625]

15 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Except that from what we can see at the moment I really can't criticise the actions of the BBC.

I was being facetious . . .

[Yellow Fever 3,824]

43 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

The lawyers always do well. Out of anything really.

For me that's maybe the oddest part, how does a 20 year old allegedly addicted to crack and of apparently  means is able to fund lawyers people have heard of.

I think though that their interest in this will now cease. Neither paper, nor BBC will make the celebrity known and I think the kid's identity isn't public so no real possibility of a libel trial

 

Pro bono or if you like no win no fee.

I think they see it most likely as a money spinner. A lottery where they've been given most of the tickets.

Compare with 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49576940

Edited July 11, 2023 by Yellow Fever

[dylanisabaddog 4,977]

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

The lawyers always do well. Out of anything really.

For me that's maybe the oddest part, how does a 20 year old allegedly addicted to crack and of apparently  means is able to fund lawyers people have heard of.

I think though that their interest in this will now cease. Neither paper, nor BBC will make the celebrity known and I think the kid's identity isn't public so no real possibility of a libel trial

 

Perhaps he's going to fund it the same way he funded his drug addiction? 

[benchwarmer 625]

The BBC now says it took seven weeks for them to inform the person concerned about the allegations.

Which means that if, during that time, he continued his alleged activities, the BBC was complicit.

Edited July 11, 2023 by benchwarmer

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

13 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

The BBC now says it took seven weeks for them to inform the person concerned about the allegations.

Which means that if, during that time, he continued his alleged activities, the BBC was complicit.

Why didn't they repeat it? They do with their programmes. Although listening to the DG, it had to go through about ten committees before they send the letter or email.

Edited July 11, 2023 by keelansgrandad

[KiwiScot 1,460]

4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I spend that on scratch cards a day

35k take it or leave it

[KiwiScot 1,460]

So many young people are selling themselves online these days and conversely so many adults are messenging young people in that way and trying to buy them. Then there is Onlyfans as an official version(18+) of it. I'm glad I'm not a teenager growing up now I'd probably have been broke with nothing to show for it. Not interested in it as an adult.

Edited July 11, 2023 by KiwiScot

[dylanisabaddog 4,977]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66165766

And another one 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66165766

And another one 

Perhaps its a serial

[Barbe bleu 832]

3 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Perhaps he's going to fund it the same way he funded his drug addiction? 

(Monocle emoji) (winky face emoji)

[cambridgeshire canary 6,794]

Todays news:

 

The Sun are now withdrawing all the reports that the person in question was below 18 and its also come out that huw- Sorry, who ever this person was they bought their nudes legally on Onlyfans.

Dear oh dear. Well, his career is ruined over nothing if this is true.

[Herman 9,821]

51 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Todays news:

 

The Sun are now withdrawing all the reports that the person in question was below 18 and its also come out that huw- Sorry, who ever this person was they bought their nudes legally on Onlyfans.

Dear oh dear. Well, his career is ruined over nothing if this is true.

Nevermind. Murdoch has deep pockets. But it's been an expensive year for him. 😂

[Mello Yello 2,302]

Huw an' Cry....

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Might be legal in Wales.

Talking of Wales, anyone heard from VW?

[Barbe bleu 832]

3 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Todays news:

 

The Sun are now withdrawing all the reports that the person in question was below 18 and its also come out that huw- Sorry, who ever this person was they bought their nudes legally on Onlyfans.

Dear oh dear. Well, his career is ruined over nothing if this is true.

Did the Sun ever claim that the photos were of an under 18?  The original article is still online (updated 2 days ago) and says only that photos were paid for and that messages started when the boy was 17.

My recollection (I may be wrong) is that speculation about an offence came later and in other places. 

This might explain why police who investigated in April said no offence was commited and why the boy's solicitors made the fairly guarded statement they did.

 

[Barry Brockes 148]

Politicalite have gone public with a name.

[ricardo 7,398]

4 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Todays news:

 

The Sun are now withdrawing all the reports that the person in question was below 18 and its also come out that huw- Sorry, who ever this person was they bought their nudes legally on Onlyfans.

Dear oh dear. Well, his career is ruined over nothing if this is true.

All a bit grubby and sordid but hardly in the Saville category.

[TheGunnShow 5,994]

1 hour ago, Barry Brockes said:

Politicalite have gone public with a name.

They've put this in as well.

RUMOUR RUBBISHED: Teen at centre of BBC presenter controversy says allegations “are rubbish” - Politicalite

Alongside this....

EXCLUSIVE: BBC News star Huw Edwards is the BBC Presenter at centre of £35k sex pic allegations - Politicalite

Edited July 12, 2023 by TheGunnShow

[KiwiScot 1,460]

Meanwhile at the Palace word has been sent that his services are no longer required, but Andrew might have a job for him.

[Yellow Fever 3,824]

1 hour ago, ricardo said:

All a bit grubby and sordid but hardly in the Saville category.

This is exactly the issue Ricardo.

It appears the 'Sun' bigged it up principally as an attack on the BBC. They were 'blind' in their eagerness to portray the BBC in a bad light.' Neither does it appear did the Sun really did it's due diligence and checked the story out (speak to the victim). They even failed to print or acknowledge his rebuttal in good time.

Its' the Sun that also need it processes investigating here!

[dylanisabaddog 4,977]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

They've put this in as well.

RUMOUR RUBBISHED: Teen at centre of BBC presenter controversy says allegations “are rubbish” - Politicalite

Alongside this....

EXCLUSIVE: BBC News star Huw Edwards is the BBC Presenter at centre of £35k sex pic allegations - Politicalite

After what he's done to Norton, Campbell, Vine and Lineker he thoroughly deserves to be named and shamed. 

[......and Smith must score. 1,360]

On 10/07/2023 at 15:05, Herman said:

I haven't seen Richard Baker do the news for a while. Just saying. 

Kudos to him if it is.

Edited July 12, 2023 by ......and Smith must score.

[......and Smith must score. 1,360]

On 10/07/2023 at 17:11, keelansgrandad said:

I'm trying to imagine Alvar Lidell in underpants. 

That and a bow-tie really hits the spot

[Yellow Fever 3,824]

38 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

After what he's done to Norton, Campbell, Vine and Lineker he thoroughly deserves to be named and shamed. 

Unless of course it's all a fiction and/or nothing illegal happened.

Is the offence 'gross misconduct' - but he'd have to be named by the BBC for that!

It's tricky if at worst it was between consenting adults. 

I'm not trying to defend what may of happened but those who live in greenhouses shouldn't throw stones!

[ricardo 7,398]

Police say no action, nothing illegal. I think this means the Sun could be in deep trouble for over egging the story.

 

[TheGunnShow 5,994]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

This is exactly the issue Ricardo.

It appears the 'Sun' bigged it up principally as an attack on the BBC. They were 'blind' in their eagerness to portray the BBC in a bad light.' Neither does it appear did the Sun really did it's due diligence and checked the story out (speak to the victim). They even failed to print or acknowledge his rebuttal in good time.

Its' the Sun that also need it processes investigating here!

Said in the recent BEEB thread that it's fairly clear some just want to see the BEEB have the licence fee taken away. Gonna love this if the Sun goes the same way as the Lose of the Screws.

[Barry Brockes 148]

 

Huw Edwards's wife names him as BBC presenter at centre of scandal

https://f7td5.app.goo.gl/dLbt1n

Sent via @updayUK