BBC Presenter Huw Edwards Suspended

Originally Posted by Pierre

So his age vs the age of the youth (may have been a minor, may have not at some time) + his fame/power and the small matter of £35K. Plus nothing at all has been reported of the mental and physical state of the youth ……other than there may have been a drug dependency issue………..

I think I’ll keep my sympathy on hold.



Oh, I agree.

But I am unsettled at what seems to be a campaign to absolve him of any agency, due to his “mental Health”. There seems to have been scant regard for the youth, so far.

---------- Post added at 22:46 ---------- Previous post was at 22:42 ----------



Accused….she was not under age, was there freely and was paid out twice. With no suggestion of illegality.

She thinks otherwise...

Ms Giuffre says the duke sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was under the age of 18....

...Ms Giuffre says in the court documents that she was forced into sex by explicit or implicit threats and because she feared the powerful connections, wealth and authority of Epstein, Ms Maxwell and Prince Andrew.

She says the duke knew her age and that she was a sex-trafficking victim.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58871849

As you stated in post #127 of this thread

A man, a much older man, with money, power and influence. Enters into a sexual (even if it is just photos) arrangement with at best an adolescent and worst a child.

It’s not good through any lens.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

She thinks otherwise...



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58871849

As you stated in post #127 of this thread

I’m not here to defend Prince Andrew, only to highlight hypocrisy.

If Prince Andrew had sex with a 17yr old girl, was that illegal?

My point is/was, which I’m sure you know but like to ignore.

Is that both are wrong and guilty, yet the machine are willing exonerate Edwards as a victim himself but would happily crucify the Prince of the same crimes.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I’m not here to defend Prince Andrew, only to highlight hypocrisy.

If Prince Andrew had sex with a 17yr old girl, was that illegal?

My point is/was, which I’m sure you know but like to ignore.

Is that both are wrong and guilty, yet the machine are willing exonerate Edwards as a victim himself but would happily crucify the Prince of the same crimes.

She is claiming sexual assault. The person involved with the Edwards story isn't. How is it the same thing?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

She is claiming sexual assault. The person involved with the Edwards story isn't. How is it the same thing?

Agreed, it's false equivalence.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

She is claiming sexual assault. The person involved with the Edwards story isn't. How is it the same thing?

There are parallels and my point is not on the legalities of each scenario but the response to them by the wider talking heads.

Both men in positions of power, both preying on vulnerable adolescents.

One was, rightly, vilified.

The other garners sympathy. I don't think he deserves sympathy. I don't think he deserves to persecuted either but I do think he needs to atone for his behaviour.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

There are parallels and my point is not on the legalities of each scenario but the response to them by the wider talking heads.

Both men in positions of power, both preying on vulnerable adolescents.

One was, rightly, vilified.

The other garners sympathy. I don't think he deserves sympathy. I don't think he deserves to persecuted either but I do think he needs to atone for his behaviour.

I don't think Damien's mentioned legalities - I think the point is that sexual assault is seen as far more serious than commissioning nude or semi-nude photographs.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't think Damien's mentioned legalities - I think the point is that sexual assault is seen as far more serious than commissioning nude or semi-nude photographs.

The basis for vilifying Prince Andrew - and I’m at the front of the queue to do so - is allegations that came to nothing. No criminal prosecution. Civil case settled out of court. Why he paid £12m is up to him; his friendship with Epstein is well publicised and regardless of the evidence he’d nothing to gain (and everything to lose) by participating.

Nobody is putting the alleged crimes on a parallel. However if we live in a world where there’s only proven illegality and acceptable behaviour we have two innocent men. Morality isn’t a factor.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

The basis for vilifying Prince Andrew - and I’m at the front of the queue to do so - is allegations that came to nothing. No criminal prosecution. Civil case settled out of court. Why he paid £12m is up to him; his friendship with Epstein is well publicised and regardless of the evidence he’d nothing to gain (and everything to lose) by participating.

Nobody is putting the alleged crimes on a parallel. However if we live in a world where there’s only proven illegality and acceptable behaviour we have two innocent men. Morality isn’t a factor.

I think the public would be inclined to have more sympathy for Prince Andrew were it not for the £12m.

I also think a lot of Hugh Edwards' peers friends and colleagues are in the media industry so we're always going to her more from them than we would from Prince Andrew's friends and colleagues. Prince Andrew's friends and colleagues may be equally supportive and empathetic but as they're not in the media they're less likely to be heard.

[Sephiroth]

I can say from first hand knowledge that Prince Andrew is/was a prime unpleasant pos.

[jfman]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...sis-management

At least Huw’s getting good advice.

It nicely detracts from the shortcomings and poor behaviour of our government overall.
Pity we allow ourselves to be distracted by what people do with other adults in private.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Maggy

It nicely detracts from the shortcomings and poor behaviour of our government overall.
Pity we allow ourselves to be distracted by what people do with other adults in private.

Where did that come from? What has this crappy government's performance got to do with Huw Edwards?

As I said in an earlier post: "Next?".

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Maggy

It nicely detracts from the shortcomings and poor behaviour of our government overall.
Pity we allow ourselves to be distracted by what people do with other adults in private.

How does a journalist or presenter hold to account morally corrupt politicians if they too are morally corrupt

[Sephiroth]

Yep.

Originally Posted by jfman

How does a journalist or presenter hold to account morally corrupt politicians if they too are morally corrupt

AFAIK, there is still no evidence of anything illegal having happened.

"Morally corrupt" is a meaningless term, what one person considers corrupt, another does not.