BBC Scandal - Huw Edwards formally suspended over payment of explicit images of teenager Read OP*

I said in an earlier post that I thought Edwards could make a return to broadcasting. In the light of today's charges I have to change my mind. Category A images are as depraved as can be ever seen. He is toast and will most likely be shunned by society.

He was one of the main faces of the BBC. It's hard to believe his sexual predilection only started during lockdown. We may never know the true extent of his sexual interest in children. I use children in the context of them being pre pubescent. If he does serve jail time I don't envy him. He'll get hell.

On the outside he had it all. A wife, family, top BBC presenter and yet he harboured truly sick and evil desires. He has to have actively pursued the attainment of these images. Surely somebody with a conscience would have sought help. I can appreciate such a move could have been humiliating. Surely the less of two evils though when you see the predicament he is in today. He is destroyed. By his own hand mind.

A bit like when politicians are caught doing something wrong people often wonder why in this day and age would they not come clean before being exposed. The common denominator is that, like them, Huw was probably arrogant enough to believe given his position he would never get caught. If he had a conscience he would not have sought out the images. The idea that lockdown is somehow to blame for all this is ridiculous

No “lockdown” certainly not to blame. My understanding is his depression greatly increased throughout lockdown and was featured in advance of the original story breaking is my understanding.
most people, don’t resort to such behaviour if depressed - maybe the depression accelerated such behaviour but the “cause”- that’s most likely someone else entirely

We may never know the true extent of his sexual interest in children.  I use children in the context of them being pre pubescent. he harboured truly sick and evil desires. He has to have actively pursued the attainment of these images.

I don't agree with that, tbh.

I remember a case of some lad being done for possessing similar images. He had downloaded some beastiality porn and they were included in the folder, he didn't look for them, didn't want them, but was still convicted (I'm not googling that one, but it was a good few years ago)

Hindsight is great but he wasn't found guilty of anything until yesterday. I wouldn't be happy with employers firing people for being under investigation.

I'm happy with them sticking to the rules and 'innocent unless proven guilty' is a good rule for everyone.

In fairness down loading bestiality pictures is also screwy but I get your point. Thankfully I have never come across images of beastiality or paedophilia.

Is this "business" going to change completely over the next short while as deepfakes will do away with the need for live victims?

How will the law reflect that new reality (if that reality does come to pass)?

Will this stuff become a "victimless crime" in the near future and unable to be prosecuted without appearing to be a "thought crime"?

But will the"game" change when digitized representations account for the overwhelming majority of the market and " live " depictions have almost died out?

Is that around the corner?

As it should be. Even if it could be argued that it's "victimless", it's feeding into a mentality and behaviour that should not be tolerated, not to mention that AI can only generate images from taking that base info from real sources.

We already have the law.

I can see it being a factor in considering if a sentence will be suspended.

They would still be depictions of minors; them being dead does not alter that at it

I suspect that depictions that could be argued to be young looking adult may be very difficult to prosecute, but those that are clearly and undeniably depictions of minors have no defense.

Totally enforceable - think of (well don’t actually) a young cartoon character - now think of that young cartoon character depicted in an illegal act relating to the topic at hand- that’s plain and simple child abuse imagery- so too are stories btw ie the written word.

An adult dressing as a child, or wearing a nappy and acting like a baby, to have sex with another adult - that's still two adults having consensual sex. An adult will look like an adult regardless of what they wear because they are an adult.