The BBC knew that Huw Edwards had been arrested in November last year, but didn't tell anyone, not even their own news teams. Say their News Teams !
One really has to concentrate whilst reading about such things. One could so easily miss that bit about who did or didn't know what, where or even WHEN !How on earth did 'The BBC' - the bosses involved that is, manage to keep that one secret ? The fact that he'd been arrested that is ? And where was The Sun 'Newspaper' while all this was going on ? Completely in the dark, as it happens ! They'd gotten their fingers slightly singed last year for their part in Huw Edwards' 'health' problems. But, I think they couldn't have known about this development, because if they had, they'd have published !
I'm actually pretty impressed by both the BBC bosses and the Police. They didn't rush to judgement, potentially ruining a man's life, until they, the Police and CPS were satisfied that there was a case to answer ! Isn't this what people like me have been suggesting since the false accusations industry's business expanded exponentially circa October 2012 ? Well yes it is !
Isn't this exactly what the police, the BBC (bosses and certain under-bosses in the newsroom) did when Jimmy Savile was being investigated in 2007/09 ? Was the BBC and the Police protecting the presumption of innocence, mindful of danger of too many people (anyone) knowing Edwards had been arrested, endangering any subsequent due process ? Or were they BOTH just protecting themselves ? After all, wasn't it the Police who explicitly stated that no criminality had been identified in regards to an earlier claim by DIFFERENT person/s (parents of a 20 year old man) as reported by The Sun four months earlier ?
Edwards was arrested and bailed on the 8th November 2023 but was not charged until Wednesday 26th June 2024.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c880zykre4lo
The Police only charged Edwards after another man had been found tried and found guilty in March this year, so that fits too !
It makes sense doesn't it ?
Accusation/s
Investigation
Arrest
More investigation (build a case)
Charging decision
Public hearing (trial) if appropriate.
And that's basically that as far as the Edwards case goes. Looks like all concerned actually did the right thing. Except for the guilty that is. Edwards that is. Like many others, I felt kind of sorry for him in July last year. The 'original claim' as it's now referred to, was something that didn't impress me back then and it doesn't now ! Something very fishy about that story. The Sun faced a huge backlash when it published those stories last year. Never mind the fact that they didn't name Edwards at the time. They didn't need to. They simply gave enough clues and hints and within days, others were being libelled on social media. Others who were alive, not guilty of anything and in a position to sue someone, should they bother, because no one who is innocent likes to be accused of a crime or potential crime, involving children - NO ONE !
Here's why some people got very very upset with The Sun, in July last year :
It wasn't just two articles either. They were coming thick and fast ! And the inference was getting more and more serious - the 'BBC star' could be arrested and even charged with a criminal offence, said ex-CPS chief : Nazir Afzal.
The Police were 'engaged' in May. Mr A was probably unaware of this. The Sun on the other hand, should have known, unless of course they were so busy with their 'sources' claims, they didn't bother to check the finer details.
NOTE : these alleged offences were said to have taken place over a three year period, when the alleged 'victim' (who himself denied anything of the sort had taken place) was allegedly 17, hence The Sun's hurry to get a legal opinion from the 'expert' Afzal !The BBC newsroom reports that the Police were approached in April 2023. I haven't delved into this but am including it because that's what their 'timeline' of events says. NOTE that the Welsh police took no further, because according to them, the claims involved an adult, not a child at all.
How did folk on social media respond to The Sun's scoop ? Exactly the way one would expect them to !
The following day, the 'star' has still NOT been identified officially. And two days later cops confirm that he will NOT be prosecuted ! End of - for now !
Two days later :
Now here's what Sky News published on the 12th July 2023.
Meanwhile, the Police !
For some reason, no one of importance was buying the story that a child was being, or had been harmed story (note the use of the word 'allegedly) which obviously must have led The Sun to feel that they had no option, but to retreat - a little ! The original stories stayed up online though !
Read that bit again :
The Sun at no point in our original story alleged criminality. Suggestions about possible criminality were first made at a later date by other media outlets, including the BBC.
Published a few days after they published Nazir Afzal's expert opinion ? They weren't going to get away with that ! Enter Owen Jones, who (again in good faith - knowing what he and the rest of us knew mid-July 2023) tweeted
And it's still there today.
Meanwhile, what was Edwards doing ? He was still getting paid, that's what he was doing ? He was also enjoying the sympathy and concern that was being shown by so many, for his welfare. The above snip along with following, is from a Sky News article dated 12th July 2023.
A year later, and knowing what we sort of 'know' now, one might be tempted into believing that The Sun did the right thing all along. They knew who the 'top star' was and they weren't alone. Where did that photo of Edwards with his pants down come from ? That's just one of the questions I have about this sorry case. One other being : Which came first : The investigation of Alex Williams (see above) or the investigation of Huw Edwards ? I can wait for those questions to be answered, but here's my motivation for writing this post today.
THIS
Huw Edwards was just one of hundreds of television newsmen and women who presented claims about Jimmy Savile. Claims that would never be aired in a court of law. Claims that some Police chiefs and the-then CPS chief, turned Prime Minister
, Keir Starmer decided were enough in themselves, to warrant a guilty verdict on a dead man.
Sir Jimmy had been accused of the abuse or underage girls in 2007. One of those claims began with a letter to The Sun Newspaper in 2007. The Police were eventually brought in and an investigation ended without any further action against the accused and no articles in The Sun either- NOT ONE ! Moreover the same 'newspaper' actually paid Savile damages for its attempts to link him with the Jersey scandal in 2008.
And the best part is that whilst giving Jimmy thousands of pounds in 2008, they KNEW that he was being investigated by the police. BUT, they kept it quiet. Why ? Because, he could and WOULD, have sued them - AGAIN !
So let's get down to brass tacks shall we ? Common sense denotes that anyone with the means to defend themselves against untruths, uttered either by mouth, or print, will sue and will in due course, be awarded damages commensurate with any damage done. Huw Edwards did NOT sue The Sun. He 'liked' a few tweets referring this potential redress, but he did NOT sue.
And now we know why he didn't sue, don't we ?
The police did not arrest Edwards until November 8th 2024. The press appear to know nothing about it, we know this because this was the sort of stuff they were saying towards the end of that month.
Huw's career did not 'restart' post November 2023 and The BBC didn't publish details of his arrest, because, according to their newsroom, a 'source' told The BBC not to !
And the press only found out he'd been charged from 'court listings' ? Really ?
Court listings ? Sorry, but LOL !
Jimmy Savile's career never ended until he died and when he did the nation (quite a lot of people that is) grieved his loss. Meanwhile, a BBC employee was planning his own tribute by way of a ten minute Newsnight news item to be screened a few months after his death.
That employee had hearsay evidence that Savile had abused underage schoolgirls, nothing more, when he sent this email to his immediate superior at the BBC. Thanks to The Wayback Machine I was able to quickly access Appendix 12 of The Pollard Report - AGAIN !
A few days or so after Jones sent this, his researcher found evidence that there may have been a police investigation into similar or even, the same claims he'd found online before Savile died. He didn't wait for confirmation from the police, he went straight ahead with preparations to make and broadcast his film. It was actually in the ready-to transmit/editing stage when his immediate superior pulled it - for good reason.
Despite Savile being dead so he couldn't sue, Meirion Jones' superiors decided they would not broadcast Jones' film because the Police and the CPS confirmed that whilst there had indeed been an investigation into claims made involving a BBC star; there had in 2008/9 been insufficient evidence with which to base a prosecution. No arrest. No charge. Nothing !
The Sun Newspaper knew this. The BBC knew this. And for two years more Jimmy Savile lived and was not charged with ONE single offence.
Need I say more ?
No, so I won't ! Except this wee gem of evidence for the defence !
Jones failed in his bid to destroy a man who couldn't sue ! A few months later the press showed little or no interest in the story published about it.
You can read more about this in these few posts I prepared earlier - much earlier.
Enjoy !
