Jump to content

BBC presenter paying for sexual images


Andy Mac

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Macnamara said:

if a BBC presenter has been funding a teenagers crack habit in return for nude pictures i should think that a public broadcaster would no longer want to employ that person using licence fee payers money

 

except we don't live in a reasonable world, we live in a clown world where neo-marxists run the british broadcasting company and covertly support the normalisation of pedophilia and the transitioning of children

 

I said right at the beginning that this all seemed a bit odd. Reading between the lines, given her 'it all started at 17' assertion, it seemed very obvious to me that the mother had already been to the police. Probably, prior to first going to the BBC in May and certainly before going to The Sun. Like, The Sun wouldn't have thought 'Hang on, some of this might be criminal' and asked her if she had already been to the police? It now emerges that she did just that in April and no evidence of criminality was found. So, anything a bit naughty couldn't have been proved to occur pre-adulthood. You mention the drug habit, but that it is only relevant if the person handing over the money knew about it. However, the accused BBC employee released a statement claiming that 'nothing inappropriate occurred' and that I do disagree with. It is for every individual person to decide what they think is and isn't appropriate. I, like you I presume, don't think it's appropriate for someone much older to start camming with17/18 year olds, for any reason, and then give them cash. 

 

I also seriously think that the BBC need to be held to account here. I want to know exactly what it is, in relation to the allegations made, that they found  'concerning' to begin with. Was their 'concern' solely to do with the mother's 'it all started at 17' assertion or did they simply disapprove of two consenting adults doing what was alleged to have been done? Or, maybe it is the case that they are casting aspersions against the character of those who engage in such activities on OnlyFans? The very same OnlyFans, which the BBC and the rest of the mass media seem to promote, at every given opportunity. Or, perhaps, it is only ok to engage in such activities on OnlyFans and not privately? I would like to know their views. The BBC shouldn't be allowed to muddy the waters on their position, by now focusing on allegations made by other individuals who have come forward.

 

Ultimately, the mother should feel frustrated and sickened with society as a whole. Flicking through my Freeview EPG, on an average night, I often see programmes listed with titles such as (I paraphrase) 'Grannies Smashing It', 'Swinging U.K.' and 'Freshers On The Game'. Over and over and over and over. No one needs to take my word for it! The notion that 'Everyone is for sale' has been normalised. Any BBC documentary I have seen on escorting or cocaine always seems to feature a money shot, as in cash changing hands. How is that not promotional? It is all so sick. There are a lot of things I don't like about some countries, such as Iran, but if it's a stark choice between where we seem to be heading and the Ayatollah, then I think I would go with the latter. 😒        

Edited by numnuts
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2023 at 2:47 PM, Mikhail Liebestein said:

Rylan is of the generation that is more pc and fully out in the open, so 100% it isn't him.

Good on him to jump in early and make the statement.

 

I'm suspecting it will be someone more old school and probably therefore someone who has developed a stealthy Savile like approach. It might be someone no one expects. 

 

Rylan is okay! I agree with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, what if what we are witnessing is the takedown of entertainment in general? Most freedom folks seem to be fine with the take down of the cabal, but often forget that means everything not just politics. It's our whole way of life including internet use, money, politics, religion and all entertainment.

There could come a time where any entertainment is govt approved only.

What we are watching is bread and circuses for the masses before the fall.

Let's see if channel 4 is next for a big revelation story.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I wouldn't miss it. All channels are same now, full of woke crap presented by automatons treating the audience like toddlers.

 

News went to shit years ago, same with sport, music, films and dramas. Comedy isn't comedy anymore either. All of it is just being used to push the same agenda.

 

Good riddance to their crap output.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2023 at 12:08 AM, Mazthehobo said:

 

personally I have no idea who it might be. I don’t have a license and don’t listen to the radio. But I do wonder if this revelation somehow coincides with the Schofield ‘scandal’ and something else is at play here….

 

Ditto me. Haven't listened to the radio in years, and that was Classic FM. 

 

Again ditto: seems very odd timing re Schofield and the BBC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

Huw Edwards' wife Vicky Flind names him as BBC star at centre of '£35k sex pics scandal' in a statement issued on his behalf

 

https://mol.im/a/12292255

 

 

 

 

How bizarre! I cannot believe Huw's wife said this; for one, she gives no mention of the allegations being untrue (which one would expect) or alternatively them being true and that he is sorry, only that the allegations have been made and he has severe mental health issues and will be in hospital for a long time. 

Edited by itsnotallrightjack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, itsnotallrightjack said:

 

How bizarre! I cannot believe Huw's wife said this; for one, she gives no mention of the allegations being untrue (which one would expect) or alternatively them being true and that he is sorry, only that the allegations have been made and he has severe mental health issues and will be in hospital for a long time. 

 

IMO -All's she is doing is making excuses for him.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, itsnotallrightjack said:

 

How bizarre! I cannot believe Huw's wife said this; for one, she gives no mention of the allegations being untrue (which one would expect) or alternatively them being true and that he is sorry, only that the allegations have been made and he has severe mental health issues and will be in hospital for a long time. 

 

Telegraph has a report, you can turn of javascript to read it:

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/12/bbc-presenter-accused-scandal-who-is-suspended-allegation/

Edited by Mikhail Liebestein
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, LastOneLeftInTheCounty said:

How did you know it was huw edwards so early on? 

Probably because he saw that interview, which looks like it’s been removed from this thread now , with Shaun Atwood and that bloke who wouldn’t name him but said he was Welsh , a senior news presenter and reported on the coronation. You wouldn’t have to be columbo to figure that out . 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Sidlittle said:

Probably because he saw that interview, which looks like it’s been removed from this thread now , with Shaun Atwood and that bloke who wouldn’t name him but said he was Welsh , a senior news presenter and reported on the coronation. You wouldn’t have to be columbo to figure that out . 

Furry muff then, didn’t know about that, thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sidlittle said:

Probably because he saw that interview, which looks like it’s been removed from this thread now , with Shaun Atwood and that bloke who wouldn’t name him but said he was Welsh , a senior news presenter and reported on the coronation. You wouldn’t have to be columbo to figure that out . 

Haha, I didn't twig to be fair, but that's not saying much. That Matthew steeples bloke I find quite entertaining. 

 

One thing and I'd like to know is so far he hasn't done anything illegal as far as I know. This and Schofield,  not by any means defending their actions and you can argue the morality side of it. But I can't work out why if they haven't done anything illegal, why is it all being blown up? This and Schofield, both stories almost parallel in similarity as far as I can tell, both are being reported and have peadophillic undertones in the reporting yet as far as we are aware there is nothing suggesting that?

 

This is more than sleaze gossip of the news of the world days. 

 

First I thought it was to censor the internet which they clearly want. Now I'm not so sure, although they are going to definitely use this and already are talking about online harms bill etc etc. So they are both either a cover-up and there's more or a distraction? 

 

It's all very strange.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huw naughty boy….once presenter of news at ten…. Now does nudes at ten.

 

im not too fussed about it really. Maybe no crime has been committed but he is a married man and has kids himself. Maybe we just have different values…

 

I wish him a speedy recovery, hopefully he can present the kings funeral precession in a few months.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RobinJ said:

Hmm, what if what we are witnessing is the takedown of entertainment in general? Most freedom folks seem to be fine with the take down of the cabal, but often forget that means everything not just politics. It's our whole way of life including internet use, money, politics, religion and all entertainment.

There could come a time where any entertainment is govt approved only.

What we are watching is bread and circuses for the masses before the fall.

Let's see if channel 4 is next for a big revelation story.

Could be to carpet censor the press (who let's face it amazingly people still trust anyway) and the internet at the same time. In which case this Hugh guy offing himself could prove quite beneficial to the agenda if there is one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A major question, to repeat myself, is whether the Royals had any knowledge of any of this.

He was commissioned to represent them at two major royal events, yet rumour has it this was known about since at least 2018. Doesnt this affect the constitutional oath, if they knew about it, that he was damaging and abusing young British citizens, and his own colleagues, by the sound of it, when the role of monarch is to protect the citizens? Are they so ill-advised they didnt know about it? In which case, who are the advisers?

 

This definitely IS in the public interest, because the Monarch is making decisions that will affect us all.

 

 

 

 

Edited by northern star
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mazthehobo said:

Huw naughty boy….once presenter of news at ten…. Now does nudes at ten.

 

im not too fussed about it really. Maybe no crime has been committed but he is a married man and has kids himself. Maybe we just have different values…

 

I wish him a speedy recovery, hopefully he can present the kings funeral precession in a few months.

 

 

Whilst 17 might be close but outside the criminal bounds; I still feel a tinsy winsy bit sorry for him - I think this is one of those old school repressed gay scandals.

 

He was too Welsh and too Christian to admit it to himself, so dabbled in curious ways, using methods only really applicable to someone who doesn't understand the internet.


Though ultimately you've got to feel more sorry for the wife and kids.

 

PS - I know quite a lot of gay folk, but they are not in their 60s (more 40s), so come from the slightly less repressed era.

 

In many ways it is better to have them out in the open, as otherwise you'd create more Jimmy Savile(s).

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...