[arista]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Apart from Emily Matliss and Owen Jones I dont know who these people are, anyone care to name them please?

Next Emily
is a former SkyNews reporter
now working for LBC Lewis Goodall
you would have heard him
when he filled in

Next Lewis
the Former BBC USA reporter
Jon Sopel,

All three of them with Emily are this team:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/news-agen...oodal-podcast/

The fella with glasses is a money backer

[arista]

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the 70's and 80's were a completely different time, society wasn't the same as it is now. The term pedo didn't exist

When I was at school we had a headmaster that was a pedo. All the kids knew that he liked to touch up little boys, but he remained headmaster for years. Nobody thought to call the police or anything like that, they just kept out of his way

Yeah it was a different time , but people still knew what a creep was back then. But it seems they got away with alot that frankly wouldn't slide today.

That's another thing i meant to add aswell ... people like that in certain positions of power think they're untouchable , or they convince their victims that nobody will believe them. Saville behaved like he had control over people, he looked like he was calling the shots and best buddies with members of the royal family aswell, which is unbelievable .

It's pretty disgusting and shocking when a known predator can just carry on though, and people have to just 'stay out their way' . Someone that dangerous having that much influence and still being allowed to work around anyone let alone children... is just mind baffling .

[Gusto Brunt]

Originally Posted by arista

He's absolutely revolting. Unlike Savile who we all know what he was even before his crimes came out.

Edwards hid it so well. Lord knows what other sex peado crimes he's done. I think we might be skimming the surface.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

He's absolutely revolting. Unlike Savile who we all know what he was even before his crimes came out.

Edwards hid it so well. Lord knows what other sex peado crimes he's done. I think we might be skimming the surface.

That's my thinking too.
Your second point really concerning.

[arista]

Yes Gusto
it stinks

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by Gusto Brunt

He's absolutely revolting. Unlike Savile who we all know what he was even before his crimes came out.

Edwards hid it so well. Lord knows what other sex peado crimes he's done. I think we might be skimming the surface.

I think they're striking cases in different ways. Saville because, in hindsight, it's so obvious that he was a very very strange man that it seems bizarre he was ever such a huge and well regarded celebrity. A real oddball.

Edwards is almost the opposite - outwardly an extremely normal and straight-laced guy... but absolutely horrendous demons hiding behind the facade. Which I think for obvious reasons, seems "scarier". We all like to think we can spot "a Saville" lurking. It's scarier when you realise that completely average-seeming blokes might be monsters.

[GiRTh]

One thing that bothered me is the BBC saying they knew nothing of the investigation by the Met. Bullsh*t.

Investigations departments talk to each other because one investigation may impact the other. SO when the BBc Spokesperson on the news last night was claiming they knew nothing, I was shouting bullsh*t at the screen.


The BBC needs to be very carful how they handle this but its clear they dont give a ******. To give him a pay rise during his suspension. The optics are terrible. They also need to explain why they weren't more involved in the Met investigation not claim they knew nothing about it.

[bots]

i honestly think there is and probably always has been a pedo ring at the BBC. There have been too many incidents now where the BBC claim to be completely unaware. It's the type of organisation that could easily hide nasty goings on all paid for by the general public.

It's grown way too big, it needs to be cut right back to provide news and public service announcements only. They could realistically run an operation with 100 employees and the public could contribute Ł1 every 5 years for its continued existance

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

One thing that bothered me is the BBC saying they knew nothing of the investigation by the Met. Bullsh*t.

Investigations departments talk to each other because one investigation may impact the other. SO when the BBc Spokesperson on the news last night was claiming they knew nothing, I was shouting bullsh*t at the screen.


The BBC needs to be very carful how they handle this but its clear they dont give a ******. To give him a pay rise during his suspension. The optics are terrible. They also need to explain why they weren't more involved in the Met investigation not claim they knew nothing about it.

TBF on the pay rise I genuinely reckon that will have been contractually pre-arranged and they wouldn't have had grounds to break the contract while he was just "under investigation" without opening themselves up to legal action had nothing come of the accusations. It's different now that he's been charged. I doubt they sat round a table and said "Let's give him more money!" they'll have consulted a legal team and been advised to honour what was in his current contract (for the time being).

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

TBF on the pay rise I genuinely reckon that will have been contractually pre-arranged and they wouldn't have had grounds to break the contract while he was just "under investigation" without opening themselves up to legal action had nothing come of the accusations. It's different now that he's been charged. I doubt they sat round a table and said "Let's give him more money!" they'll have consulted a legal team and been advised to honour what was in his current contract (for the time being).

I thought he was suspended. IF so then the pay rise should have been suspended too.

I think they had another brain fart or they thought the charges would go away. Either way I see nothing other than incompetence by the BBC ,again.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

TBF on the pay rise I genuinely reckon that will have been contractually pre-arranged and they wouldn't have had grounds to break the contract while he was just "under investigation" without opening themselves up to legal action had nothing come of the accusations. It's different now that he's been charged. I doubt they sat round a table and said "Let's give him more money!" they'll have consulted a legal team and been advised to honour what was in his current contract (for the time being).

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I thought he was suspended. IF so then the pay rise should have been suspended too.

…yeah, just what Girth said, I was about to say….i wouldn’t have said that any contract would have been ‘airtight’ so that the raise couldn’t have been suspended also and then back paid if that eventually came about that he was cleared of any wrong doing…especially as the BBC is a public financed organisation, so that has to be factored as well in contracts…

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

…yeah, just what Girth said, I was about to say….i wouldn’t have said that any contract would have been ‘airtight’ so that the raise couldn’t have been suspended also and then back paid if that eventually came about that he was cleared of any wrong doing…especially as the BBC is a public financed organisation, so that has to be factored as well in contracts…

Contracts tend to stipulate full pay during suspension unless there are established grounds and I think that would extend to any pay raises that were pre-arranged as part of the initial contract or anything contractually agreed before the suspension. You could argue otherwise but the court costs of doing so can end up amounting to more than simply honouring the contracted pay agreements.

Whether or not they should have risked the financial hit in favour of optics is a different debate but you'll often find that when it comes to finances/legal stuff there's no real "decision maker" at the wheel it's all just arbitrary.

If they did an annual pay review this year and decided to give him a raise, that would be another matter. I just think it's hard to fully judge unless we know it's a merit-based decision to increase pay, or a previously agreed incremental pay increase.

[bots]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I thought he was suspended. IF so then the pay rise should have been suspended too.

I think they had another brain fart or they thought the charges would go away. Either way I see nothing other than incompetence by the BBC ,again.

No, he wasn't suspended, he ran off and checked himself into a mental health clinic, so he was on the sick. Thats what led to the .... "you are all picking on Huw and he has had a breakdown" bollocks

[GiRTh]

Are we saying the BBC took no action against Edwards and he was a normal employee. Thats even worse.

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

No, he wasn't suspended, he ran off and checked himself into a mental health clinic, so he was on the sick

Even worse then - refusing an agreed increase while the employee is off sick on mental health grounds... litigation lawyers would be ALL OVER that (had he not been legitimately charged later).

[GiRTh]

I'm not much on employment law. So even if an employee is off sick they cannot suspend them for any reason at all. I would have thought the charges were so serious that a failure to suspend him raises eyebrows to they polices.

That means an employee can go off sick and they are, effectively, untouchable as long as they are off sick

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

No, he wasn't suspended, he ran off and checked himself into a mental health clinic, so he was on the sick. Thats what led to the .... "you are all picking on Huw and he has had a breakdown" bollocks

…yeah, that would make more sense than him receiving his hefty salary increase while he was suspended on serious allegations…

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I'm not much on employment law. So even if an employee is off sick they cannot suspend them for any reason at all. I would have thought the charges were so serious that a failure to suspend him raises eyebrows to they polices.

That means an employee can go off sick and they effectively untouchable as long as they are off sick

The original stuff (about him communicating with a teenage boy) seemingly sort of went away and then he went off sick on mental health grounds (with various people claiming he'd been incorrectly targetted). The charges against him now (the paedophilic content found on his phone) are relatively new, and he has been suspended now that there are legitimate charges. When the pay increase was put through there were no active charges (as far as had been reported, I assume he was being quietly investigated and evidence gathered).

As far as I understand anyway. He was only properly charged a few weeks back.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The original stuff seemingly sort of went away and then he went off sick on mental health grounds (with various people claiming he'd been incorrectly targetted). The charges against him now are relatively new, and he has been suspended now that there are legitimate charges. When the pay increase was put through there were no active charges (as far as had been reported, I assume he was being quietly investigated and evidence gathered).

As far as I understand anyway. He was only properly charged a few weeks back.

He was arrested in November and the BBC admit they knew about it.

It all smacks of a cover up and the BBC claiming they didnt have information that they could easily have requested from the MET.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I'm not much on employment law. So even if an employee is off sick they cannot suspend them for any reason at all. I would have thought the charges were so serious that a failure to suspend him raises eyebrows to they polices.

That means an employee can go off sick and they effectively untouchable as long as they are off sick

…yep, especially as well and definitely with any ‘stress related’ struggles to prevent from being able to continue your roll at that time…/…that makes more sense now, as to why he was given the increase…obviously I’m not in agreement with it but it makes more sense…

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

He was arrested in November and the BBC admit they knew about it.

It all smacks of a cover up and the BBC claiming they didnt have information that they could easily have requested from the MET.

I'm pretty sure the arrest in November related to allegations that he'd been sending messages of a sexual nature back and forth with a teenager (which I think we can now guess is probably true) but nothing stuck there, and the recent arrest and charge is, technically, a totally separate charge.

They may well have started gathering evidence on these charges back then but they wouldn't have arrested and charged until they had a solid investigation/evidence... they pay rise thing happened somewhere in the middle of that, after the initial arrest but before these charges.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I'm pretty sure the arrest in November related to allegations that he'd been sending messages of a sexual nature back and forth with a teenager (which I think we can now guess is probably true) but nothing stuck there, and the recent arrest and charge is, technically, a totally separate charge.

They may well have started gathering evidence on these charges back then but they wouldn't have arrested and charged until they had a solid investigation/evidence... they pay rise thing happened somewhere in the middle of that, after the initial arrest but before these charges.

Yep. They seem to be completely separate charges. It makes a bit more sense now as the investigators cannot go beyond the scope of their investigation.

Given that, the BBC still needs to explain their stance. Why they are trying to gaslight by claiming they knew nothing but they could have requested the evidence from the met and, due to the high profile nature of the case, they would have probably got the enough information to make a decision.

AS for Edward and his anger at the time of the first charges. I now have to laugh. WHen you're up to no good you cant get shiity with people when they find out but its surprising how often people do. Its poetic, the way he has fallen from grace

[Beso]

They payed him 250 grand after the conviction didnt they?

[bots]

The BBC really aren't accountable to the public at all, everything is agreed by "old boy" networks behind closed doors. We just pay for it