Will Huw Edwards get a custodial sentence?

BigBopper

Then we wonder why this country is full of paedophiles, rapists, murderers and sex traffickers.

We do not have a justice system fit for purpose. Shame on the government.

I agree.

Because there is not enough prison space, is no answer in my opinion.

It was never about lack of prison spaces.

His punishment is in line with what others are now, and have been given.

What do you think his sentence should be Grandma70 s ?
Do you have grandchildren how would you feel if it was your grandchild being abused to titillate some dirty old man ?

That should read I DON’T think the sentence is lenient.

Wonder if you'd feel the same if it was one of your children/grandchildren/nieces/nephews that had been filmed or photographed and the images sold to paedophiles to drool over?

I agree about the
Because there is not enough prison space, is no answer but it’s evidently a fact.
So what’s the option?
Starmer, IMO, despite his expertise, very sensibly left it in the hands of the court.
What could he have done?
Since the crime is one of abuse, he could have backed up his decision to keep people accused of violence or abuse in prison.

To add to the confusion, I thought Edwards was accused of making indecent images.
I then read
The offence of making indecent images of children relates to the images that were sent to Edwards. Prosecutors did not allege Edwards had literally made the images in question.
Why then was he not accused of receiving and viewing the images?
He would still be guilty, and the children would still have been abused to facilitate his viewing.

He faced three charges of 'making indecent images of children'.

BlueBelle

What do you think his sentence should be Grandma70 s ?
Do you have grandchildren how would you feel if it was your grandchild being abused to titillate some dirty old man ?

I think his sentence is probably about right. I don’t believe in revenge punishments.

Yes, I have grandchildren. I don’t think I would feel any different. The damage has been done and we will not undo it by a custodial sentence.

Kate1949

He faced three charges of 'making indecent images of children'.

I know.
But the quote I put above says * The prosecutors did not allege that Edwards had made the images in question.
So why didn’t they if he did actually make them?

To me, it shows how little interest there is in stopping this vile abuse, otherwise there would be a stronger sentence.
When you can be jailed for pushing against a police officer or chucking eggs at one or saying something racially offensive online but get a short suspended sentence for viewing children being sexually abused amongst other things, then what other view of this is possible?

I agree with u totally. He should be hung, drawn & quartered! Filty, vile creature. He is not a man.🤔

Oreo

To me, it shows how little interest there is in stopping this vile abuse, otherwise there would be a stronger sentence.
When you can be jailed for pushing against a police officer or chucking eggs at one or saying something racially offensive online but get a short suspended sentence for viewing children being sexually abused amongst other things, then what other view of this is possible?

Totally agree Oreo

I often wonder what it would be like if we had lots of prison spaces?
Would things be different then?

Sadly I also think that men[in courts] maybe a whole lot more lenient on other men, than women might be.
Dont care if someone calls me sexist for that in any way.

It is not about revenge, but deterrence. Men like this are very hard to rehabilitate - their proclivities seem to be hard-wired and courses are unlikely to have any value. If they knew they would go to prison then, in spite of their natures being unchangeable, it might just put them off - and without the viewers the trade dies. But how to identify those doing this?

The internet has a huge part to pay in this kinds of crimes.

It gives access to others of the same ilk, unfortunately.

I dont think we treat the safeguarding of children in any way seriously. I think there is still an antiquated view about this type of internet crime. Sentences such of this are a betrayal of children. Oh and Hugh Edward's mental health is of so little interest to me I cant even articulate it.

Grandma70s

BlueBelle

What do you think his sentence should be Grandma70 s ?
Do you have grandchildren how would you feel if it was your grandchild being abused to titillate some dirty old man ?

I think his sentence is probably about right. I don’t believe in revenge punishments.

Yes, I have grandchildren. I don’t think I would feel any different. The damage has been done and we will not undo it by a custodial sentence.

The damage has been done and we will not undo it by a custodial sentence. but you can equally say that about any offence. Imprisoning the offender does not undo any crime does it?
I really find it amazing that if one of your children or grandchildren was filmed being penetrated by an adult pervert you'd think that someone who bought those images being given 7 years on the sex offenders list and a sex offender treatment course was a right and proper punishment. A suspended sentence is no sentence at all unless the offender intends to reoffend within the suspension period.

^I think his sentence is probably about right. I don’t believe in revenge punishments.
Yes, I have grandchildren. I don’t think I would feel any different. The damage has been done and we will not undo it by a custodial sentence.^

Granny70s What is a revenge punishment? I understood that a custodial sentence was a punishment whereby the offender would have the opportunity to be rehabilitated and receive any appropriate psychological treatment. Are you saying that custodial sentences are purely to exact revenge on the perpetrators? Do you feel the same way about murderers? Rapists? Afterall, a custodial sentence wouldn't bring the dead back would it? Should all offenders simply be on license for a given period in the hope that they wouldn't do it again? Where would you draw the line? Genuine question.

He should have been jailed for 6 months.

Mollygo

I agree about the
Because there is not enough prison space, is no answer but it’s evidently a fact.
So what’s the option?
Starmer, IMO, despite his expertise, very sensibly left it in the hands of the court.
What could he have done?
Since the crime is one of abuse, he could have backed up his decision to keep people accused of violence or abuse in prison.

To add to the confusion, I thought Edwards was accused of making indecent images.
I then read
The offence of making indecent images of children relates to the images that were sent to Edwards. Prosecutors did not allege Edwards had literally made the images in question.
Why then was he not accused of receiving and viewing the images?
He would still be guilty, and the children would still have been abused to facilitate his viewing.

In law 'making obscene images' includes simply opening a file sent to you (with knowledge of what it may contain).
Alex Williams who supplied the images received a suspended 12 month sentence so there really was no suggestion that Huw Edward would go to prison.

You can read the sentencing remarks if you go into “judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl” in the post below.

x.com/k_ingalasmith/status/1835676872094478477?s=61&t=qph6ruaz5B5GPjDn7jnZBw

Our society, like many others has only begun to have any idea about the significant numbers of men (and it usually is men) who find children, even babies and infants, sexually attractive.
In the past, excessing images / videos of children being sexually abused was quite difficult. Not any more - it’s at the fingertip on any iPhone.

Someone mentioned upthread that eventually, looking at images won’t be enough. Apologies for not quoting the post and thanks to you poster for raising this. You are absolutely correct. It’s like any other behaviour the individual finds interesting, satisfying, curiosity expands, it’s more rewarding, it escalates, it’s more rewarding then real live children are needed to meet the growing need

I wonder what the sentence would be for the perpetrator if Huw Edwards had been anally raped, filmed and the subsequent images sold online?

Good question Nanee49 .
I expect the issue of consent would have been a big issue, as it has been in other such cases.

we should not refer to child pornography, that is akin to the term child prostitution.
pornography is pictures or writing about adults engaging in sexual activity, or pretending to do so.
it is a type of work.
children do not choose this trade; these are images of criminal activity against children.

I agree welbeck. I’ve noticed the majority here refer to images of children being sexually abused.