Occam's Razor doesn't require a Johnson angle for them to do this.
Huw Edwards | Charged with making indecent images of children
- Thread starter Sparky Rhiwabon
- Start date
Occam's Razor doesn't require a Johnson angle for them to do this.
yeah the Johnson stuff is a bit much. Not everything’s a dead cat, and anyway he’s out of the picture anyway.
It’s far more likely that The Sun simply saw an opportunity to hurt the BBC (Murdochs main purpose) as well as riding the Schofield scandal sales slip stream… and they’re all such nasty immoral cnuts they thought they could get away with it cos they usually do.
It’s far more likely that The Sun simply saw an opportunity to hurt the BBC (Murdochs main purpose) as well as riding the Schofield scandal sales slip stream… and they’re all such nasty immoral cnuts they thought they could get away with it cos they usually do.
He's not out of the picture though, is he?
He's out of power and not coming back.
He's trying to pervert the course of justice on the biggest event in the 20th century.
World War II?
He kind of is though. For now anyway. And The Sun were one of the papers that turned on him in the end when they saw the way the wind was changing. Murdoch’s a cancer but he knows when to get off a politicians train when it’s expedient. There’s no cache in supporting Boris when Murdoch can fulfil his aims another way - one of which has always been to destroy the Beeb. It makes far more sense to pursue that this way than in some long game to rehabilitate Johnson.
Live Aid?
I saw one report where they referred to the young person as she but that could have been an error. I think everyone is assuming it is a young man due to the persistent use of the term young person.
It's that people can be sexually interested in both their wife of many years and also young men that I was getting at. Calling him gay (which he may well be) implies the marriage was never an honest one.
The (real) treble?
Rooney vs Vardy21st century ffs
When his time has come I really hope they bury Murdoch close to Margaret Thatcher so i can finally dance on her grave and piss on his at the same time.
I hope he gets the Hitler treatment and has a stone outside where he was born
He’s clearly been told by Sunak that he’s not going to be signed off for ever and needs to get a job.
Slightly random update after so long.
I hope wherever he is and whatever he is doing with his days he is in a better headspace. Mental illness is torture.
Huw Edwards charged with making indecent images of children
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgr49q591go
Well that's a development.
... The Sun were the good guys all along?
Why is he looking into my soul?
Christ. Title change needed.
Wrong’un cnut!
No sooner did the details emerge he was close to a young man, it was kinda clear where this was heading.
Wtf is the matter with these people.
Is anybody normal? You can't trust anybody.
Is the suggestion he took a picture and sent it via WhatsApp and that’s the ‘creation’ element?
I like this.
Anyone got him in the Deadpool comp?
Making indecent images generally just means they have made a copy on their hard drive.
We charge “making” rather than “possessing” indecent images because it means that if the image was deleted but retrieved through digital forensic work they were not actually in possession of it at the time the devices were seized.
I am relatively surprised he had been charged if it is someone over 16 years old. I wouldn’t have pursued a charge for it for a normal member of the public
It must be your child-like innocence. And genitals, obviously.Why is he looking into my soul?
Mail saying 37 images and 6 in the most serious category
I too retract this post. Feck mental illness, Paedophiles inflict life long torture upon their victims and I hope he’s dealt with and gets what’s coming to him.
Could he be getting charged over different images to the ones that kicked off the fuss in the papers?
Don't you need to be 18 to send nude pics so it could be the guy he was paying loads? Maybe it is another individual and the saga is taking a grim new twist.
Calling it ‘making’ sounds like he took the picture himself, which might not necessarily be the case?
Nope. That would’ve been “taking.” Used to get minor outrage when my suspects would be in local media for “making” indecent images and the comments on Facebook would assume he had taken them himself.l rather than simply got them online.
You do. However public interest factors are also taken into account. Only times I have got charges for an image of someone 16 and over was when it was a registered sex offender who had them, as there was a public interest in it.
Generally it’s not in the public interest to criminalise somebody for an image of somebody they literally could have sex with. As @Pogue Mahone said in his reply to me, it is possible this involves somebody else.
The world is weird.