Martin Clunes as Huw Edwards

I remember reading quite some time ago that Edwards refused to ‘allow’ another person or persons to be on the News with him, as a lot of the other news programmes do. So he was arrogant then!!

I found this programme riveting.
Mainly because of Martin Clunes acting and the subject.

Of course it was uncomfortable viewing for some.
But personally I would rather feel uncomfortable and know that this man has been exposed for what he is.
Sometimes the truth is never pretty.

Luckygirl3

I have been reading some of the reviews in the papers and was amazed that some criticised the acting, which I thought was impeccable, aside from whether it should have been made or made now

I thought the acting was very good, too.

I'm not sure that there could be a drama from HE's 'side of the story'. It's pretty obvious what he got out of it (we saw a couple of seconds of that - highly edited - in case anyone was in doubt). At best his side of the story would be like that awful desert island programme with Phillip Schofield - all about how painful it is to be exposed, but nothing remotely insightful or contritious. At worst it would be unscreenable.

And yes, Greciangirl, I agree that it should not only be 'easy' subjects that are televised.

Never ever thought Huw Edwards would be such a depraved man. Never.

But we need to know that and how these people operate in order to protect new victims.

Yes, and to let people know that whilst there will always be some who jump to the conclusion that a victim with little or no money must be lying if the perpetrator is well-off, there is a possibility of some sort of justice. And it might make it less likely that huge companies such as the BBC will cover for high profile employees knowing that they are going to be portrayed in a bad light.

Doodledog

Yes, and to let people know that whilst there will always be some who jump to the conclusion that a victim with little or no money must be lying if the perpetrator is well-off, there is a possibility of some sort of justice. And it might make it less likely that huge companies such as the BBC will cover for high profile employees knowing that they are going to be portrayed in a bad light.

Few victims report their experiences because getting any kind of justice is so rare. Even if the case reaches to 80% likelihood of conviction that means the CPS will advise police to charge, there will be long delays before it reaches the criminal court. The victim will be advised not to seek therapy until after the court case. The defence team can request sight of therapy notes and use them in cross exam.

It seems as with other high profile tv presenters, his employer was aware of concerns before it became public knowledge. No wonder so few complaints are made and fewer still pursued

Exactly. Which is why programmes such as this can be helpful.

The BBC needs to put its house in order as regards complaints about their employees. Whatever their status it needs to be taken seriously.

I totally agree with all the posts :-
Very good acting
A story that needs to be told
May help some being abused (may not) young people rarely watch celestial TV
Definitely good to open all people’s eyes (have the programmes about Saville, Glitter etc opened people’s eyes enough)
However
I still believe it’s way too soon. Surely there has been enough information on the news programmes about this man to tell everyone what he did, (and open eyes) I don’t think it is necessary to be turned into ‘entertainment’ …a play not at this point anyway
So all in all I think the tv producers and Clunes made a mistake. It’s not entertainment and at this stage should have stayed as factual news.

Someone mentioned pornography in relation to all this.
Also child performers.
Pornography is a business involving sexual images of adults.
Anything involving children are images of child sexual abuse.
Likewise they are not child performers but victims.
Terminology matters because it frames concepts and makes links in our minds.

wellbeck, absolutely right. Thanks for repeating what by now, we all should know. There is no such thing as child pornography. There are images of child sexual abuse. I try not to share anyone’s history without their explicit consent. In this case I have that. The young woman aged 28 recalled being taken to Amsterdam by her mum at age seven. She was filmed in a ‘medical story’ with an adult male. That video was (and is) on the internet.
I struggle not to be outraged when abuse of children, including the 17 year old boy we are discussing, is diminished in any wayb

Well said, welbeck.

Is it ever too soon to make the public aware f the extent of these atrocities?
Martin Clunes was brave to take on this part imo.
He is such a versatile actor.

Pigma

Dickens
Several reports in the press over recent months have said that he was hoping to make a comeback, including hiring a representative to assist with this. I read that he had had new promotional photographs taken although these were later removed from social media.

Thanks for that Pigma.

I'm astounded that he is seriously considering this. He's on the Sex Offenders register isn't he?

I do wonder just who would be prepared to take him, or promote him.

Maybe my thinking is behind-the-times, and I admit I haven't read extensively on this case. If he needs to earn money surely there must be 'back-office' jobs he could do - or even WFH?

Luckygirl3

It sounds as though the parents went to the BBC and got short shrift which is why the stepfather wanted to go to the media.

It is not clear why they did not turn to the police, but the history of accusations against celebrities not being taken seriously is a concern that might have been in their minds.

If this drama does nothing else it serves to remind the authorities to keep an open mind when it comes to investigating high profile individuals.

The stepfather seemed pretty vile himself. Imagine being a teenager having to live with him.

Allira

Well said, welbeck.

Is it ever too soon to make the public aware f the extent of these atrocities?
Martin Clunes was brave to take on this part imo.
He is such a versatile actor.

I agree completely.

Big strong messages need to go out that just because you’re well known and wealthy it doesn’t mean you can get away with despicable disgusting sexual abuse of children.

I felt very uncomfortable when I watched the drama about Saville.

The BBC certainly do need to out their house in order!

*put!

So, so disturbing.

I hope that “Ryan” has found peace.

Is it ever too soon to make the public aware of the extent of these atrocities Alira of course it isn’t but you misinterpreted my point I totally agree it needs shouting from the rooftops, everyone needs to be aware that this happens, from the highest to the lowest, no abuser should get off, and it’s never too soon to make the general public very aware of these atrocities, on news programmes and factual documentaries, but I do think it’s much too soon to make a play or film to entertain out of it and although I think Clunes played a good role but I think it was a mistake and I m probably in the minority.

It’s not about advertising the awful facts it’s about how they are advertised

Dickens

Pigma

Whatever our thoughts about the actual programme, if nothing else it will hopefully put an end to that deluded man’s belief that he could ever stage a ‘comeback’ - the arrogance of it!

Where did this information regarding a 'comeback' originate?

It seems so unlikely that anyone / company / organisation would want to be associated with him that it's hard to find this credible!

Barry Tomes, who is the publicist for Huw Edwards, was on Good Morning Britain yesterday.
He and Edwards had been discussing for around 9 months the likelihood of a TV programme where Edwards would explain why he had carried out those acts and also his mental health. Power: The Downfall of Huw Edwards blindsided them and in Tomes's view did not address the reasons for the abuse.
Tomes said Edwards is still entitled to have his say as everyone should be able to tell their side of a story and Tomes wanted to concentrate on not what Edwards did but why and the part his mental health played in it all. Tomes also mentioned that Edwards is well within his rights to keep the £200.000 of taxpayer's money that the BBC paid out to him. Tomes said he would do the same thing in Edwards's shoes.
If anyone wants to catch the interview with Ed Balls and Susanna Reid from yesterday morning, being described as a car crash interview, it will likely be on You Tube.

Revealed: Huw Edwards planning documentary to relaunch his career
After 18 months of silence, the disgraced newsreader is expected to use mental health in an attempt to salvage his reputation
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/03/24/how-huw-edwards-is-plotting-his-comeback/

On another Thread, a Poster wondered what was the mind set of a predator.
I think Sarnia's post might help to explain.
A predator has no shame, takes no blame and feels themself to be wronged?

It’s shameful that he’s going down the MH route as excuse for his depravity.

Is mental illness always an excuse ?