Will Huw Edwards get a custodial sentence?

So the child abuse will go on with sentences handed out like that which make little of such abuse. No mental or physical illness is an excuse to actually seek out this disgusting behaviour. Looking at it is calculating and vile and the demand for it fuelling the abuse of young innocent children.

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.
A custodial sentence may not undo the damage done, but it will prevent future abuse from those, who like Edwards, are scared of being caught but don't have access to millions to pay for 'his mental health issues' defence and thus avoid gaol.

Part of the 'establishment' - what would you expect? Oh chaps, he's been punished enough, dontchaknow? You know what they used to say about the judges....

Sentencing is guided by strict guidelines.
Any judgements that exceed guidelines may be challenged by the convicted.

But he had "no memory" of viewing the images!!

Well if that doesn't take the piss then what the hell does!

Oh sorry I really really don't remember drooling over those Images of children.

Well said readheadand everyone else appalled by the leniency of the law in this and every case of some vile furtive watcher switching on their computer and settling back to get enjoyment and satisfaction ffs!!! from these abhorrent images.
And then, the insult of lumping these shitty less than human beings with everyone with poor mental health as a defence.
So much needs to change. It's no good parroting the judiciary are working within the parameters of sentencing guidelines, those parameters need widening drastically, no more messages sent out that it's somehow ok to let this vicious, heartbreaking "trade" continue.
Severe financial penalties might be a start in the absence of long incarceration, I'm sure all of you posters who despise Hugh Edwards & his twisted ilk have your own thoughts on some kind of justice for the children betrayed over and over and over again.

Good, reasoned comments on Good Morning Britain this morning.

I think we understand that the judges do have to work within the current sentencing guidelines, but that does not stop us from expressing an opinion that sentences are too lenient.

Nannee49

Good, reasoned comments on Good Morning Britain this morning.

I watched that, I felt so sorry for the lady who was an abused child, she felt totally let down. Her campaign is under #notmyshame

While I absolutely condemn and abhor what seems to be happening on social media which counts as “hate crime” , this inconsistency worries me.
Last month, a man was jailed for re-posting three offensive images about Muslims on Facebook, even though he deleted them shortly afterwards and apologised. Yet Huw Edwards, who pleaded guilty to three counts of making indecent images of children, has been given a suspended sentence. It’s hard not to conclude we have a two-tier criminal justice system in which Islamophobia is punished more severely than paedophilia.
Lee Dunn, 51, was jailed for eight weeks in August after pleading guilty to sending a grossly offensive message.
I also think that if I am ever stupid enough go finish up in court for anything I want his defence barrister.
According to a psychiatrist who interviewed Edwards following his arrest, he endured a “psychologically challenging” upbringing.
Edwards claimed that his father had behaved “monstrously” at home and that – combined with the “puritanical” but “hypocritical” culture of the South Wales community – had left him suffering from “low self-esteem”.
Edwards said his failure to get into Oxford University (Aw diddums) had left him feeling like something of an “outsider” at the BBC, despite the fact he rose to become the corporation’s best-paid journalist and the man trusted to announce the death of the late Queen Elizabeth II. “ He suggested it was this low self-esteem that had led him to take to social media and engage with people with whom he would otherwise not have had contact.” I am speechless.
To walk free with just, I believe, a bill for £3,000 in prosecution costs and to be put on the sex offenders’ register for seven years doesn’t add up to even a slap on the wrist.

The non custodial sentence has no connection to the fact our prisons are over crowded. It’s the kind of sentence offenders like Edwards receive under current guidelines

But is it the "kind of sentence", because of the over crowding, is my point.

Or is it because it is in the main, men convicting men?

Or is it because of an historic under recognition of all the harm it causes?

Is it because of corruption at the top of society in some way?

No reason why "current guidelines" cannot be changed. If there is enough will.

Excuses by Edwards. My childhood was horrendous. Not many can have lower self esteem than me. I didn't resort to horrible crimes. His self esteem can't have been that low if he appeared on TV in front of millions of people. He's a liar and a conman.

The riot crimes included suggesting a mosque be bombed with people in it, as well as incitement to violence and hatred against muslims on on a massive scale. I have no problems with the sentences handed out for that: no place for this inn our society.

Separate issue;
The charging and sentencing for online crimes of making and accessing abusive images of children clearly needs to be looked at.

I've tried to find the dates when legislation was last reviewed. It would appear that the major laws used was enacted in 1978 and 1988 the Protection of Children Acts with more recent reviews and details added as time passed

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children

Its very complicated but I presume the criteria for custodial sentencing guidelines within current law could be changed fairly quickly as the law allows for sentences from community orders to 5 years imprisonment.

I just wonder what his four grown up children think of their father. I also wonder how Huw Edwards would have reacted if one of them had been abused at seven years old. A grim childhood is absolutely no defence. Can the BBC force him to pay back the £200;000? Apparently not. At least the knowledge that he has totally ruined what is left of his life is some retribution.

Kate1949

Excuses by Edwards. My childhood was horrendous. Not many can have lower self esteem than me. I didn't resort to horrible crimes. His self esteem can't have been that low if he appeared on TV in front of millions of people. He's a liar and a conman.

Absolutely, Kate1949. There are many people who, like yourself, have had horrendous childhoods and been the victims of all kinds of heinous crimes themselves, but they don't all go on to become abusers themselves. There's no excuse for child sexual abuse. None - full stop.

I don’t think we can imagine the scale on which this offence is being committed and we just don’t have space to imprison all of the perpetrators. The internet has massively increased access to and the market for sexual content of all categories. Huw Edward’s crimes were discovered through an initial allegation that he had been buying images from a 17 y/o through a platform called Only Fans (which should be over 18s - he doesn’t seem to have been seeking content involving children.) I came across this chart yesterday - it shows the scale of Only Fans business in the UK. This is not a small number of heinous men - it is husbands, brothers, sons and friends accessing sexual content on a huge scale.

If you have experienced abuse in any form, you would not inflict it on others. There is no excuse. Edwards moans about low self esteem. Those children will have low self esteem all their lives.

Bazza as regards getting back the £200.000 I've googled around and it depends on the terms of his contract - the BBC is exploring legal means.
They are also now considering future contracts needless to say.

Despicable man, should definitely have had a custodial sentence..
I do feel for his children because the ripples from this will definitely affect them..

I do hope the media will leave them alone.

It just shows how misled you can be by people's public persona. Originally I thought Huw Edwards had been set up by the mother of a boy featured in some photographs, then as more details emerged, possibly involved in some sort of gay liaison, and was truly repentant.
As I read the details this morning I realized what a cold, calculating man he is, pleading a challenging childhood, (blame your parents),low self-esteem (failure to get into Oxford) and doubts about his sexuality,(how lovely for his wife) as excuses then hanging on to the extra salary awarded while pleading a breakdown. He allowed other men to be suspected of his offences before he was arrested and named.
He should be in prison; it won't alter him but it would deter some of the men inhabiting this world.

Agree strongly.

I wouldn't want him living near any of my grandchildren...

If Edward’s did not get any gratification from the images, and did not ask for them, wouldn’t he have reported the matter to the police?

He paid for them, didn't he?
I havent followed every detail, because it sickens me.