Who is the BBC "Star" Sweep

[Squirrelhumper]

11 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

I’ve not read any of it but was it not supposedly through OnlyFans? 

If that’s the case then what’s the issue here other than the morals of it? 

Agree. 

Very convenient timing with Bojo stuff going on. 

That clown Sunak has had more to say about this than actual sitting PM's lying in parliament repeatedly. 

[TDYER63]

20 minutes ago, aaid said:

Two things, firstly Huw Edwards had a “serious mental health episode” and I wouldn’t want to speculate on what that might have involved, so I suspect that at first his wife’s first concern would’ve been his health.  Secondly, I doubt it’s a coincidence that when the statement did come it was minutes after the police statement that cleared him.   Obviously - and I don’t need Ally Bongo’s algorithm to state that - they were waiting for that to come out.  Whether they were asked not to by the police or were just waiting because they knew it would clear him, I don’t know. 
 

 

If you know you have done nothing wrong you don’t need the police to confirm it. 
 

[Alibi]

Funny how police can get something like this done and dusted in a few days, but Police Scotland are still targeting the SNP over whatever it is they are hoping to find after more than 2 years with no charges.  You'd almost think that PS were trying to harm the indy movement and weren't actually carrying out a genuine investigation into a possible crime.  Throw into the mix that, if I am informed correctly, the complainant was Sean Clerkin, and it doesn't look at all suspicious. Be interesting to see how long they can spin it out.

[aaid]

21 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

If you know you have done nothing wrong you don’t need the police to confirm it. 
 

No smoke without fire, eh.

[TDYER63]

46 minutes ago, aaid said:

No smoke without fire, eh.

Lets see what happens. 

I have skelfs on my arse through sitting on the fence on this board, on this occasion I  have absolutely no qualms about speaking as I see things . If I am wrong so be it. It wont be the first or the last time. I am not harassing Huw Edwards I am simply saying it as I see it. I dont think we need all the facts to get a basic understanding of what has gone on. 
 
Whether something is illegal or not does not make it right.  If my 18 yr old child was sending pictures of themselves to a 61 yr old man I don’t think I would be quite so understanding. 

We are told that children’s brains do not fully develop till they are 25 . Paying young folk for pictures IMO is morally wrong, particularly when its a person of influence . If I am alone in my thinking so be it . 

[aaid]

2 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Lets see what happens. 

I have skelfs on my arse through sitting on the fence on this board, on this occasion I  have absolutely no qualms about speaking as I see things . If I am wrong so be it. It wont be the first or the last time. I am not harassing Huw Edwards I am simply saying it as I see it. I dont think we need all the facts to get a basic understanding of what has gone on. 
 
Whether something is illegal or not does not make it right.  If my 18 yr old child was sending pictures of themselves to a 61 yr old man I don’t think I would be quite so understanding. 

We are told that children’s brains do not fully develop till they are 25 . Paying young folk for pictures IMO is morally wrong, particularly when it’s a person of influence . If I am alone in my thinking so be it . 

Unless there’s criminality, corruption or abuse of power the it’s none of my business.  

[Caledonian Craig]

31 minutes ago, aaid said:

Unless there’s criminality, corruption or abuse of power the it’s none of my business.  

I agree. However, Huw Edwards is in a powerful position and has to be seen to set a good example. This most certainly is not it. I suspect it will (or should) spell the end of him as chief BBC newsreader.

[aaid]

2 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I agree. However, Huw Edwards is in a powerful position and has to be seen to set a good example. This most certainly is not it. I suspect it will (or should) spell the end of him as chief BBC newsreader.

Why?  Do you believe or disbelieve the news more because of who reads it?

[Caledonian Craig]

6 minutes ago, aaid said:

Why?  Do you believe or disbelieve the news more because of who reads it?

No. Purely, on the grounds, like all of us in any job, he has brought the BBC into disrepute with his actions - illegal or not. That is a sackable offence in any line of work.

[aaid]

12 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

No. Purely, on the grounds, like all of us in any job, he has brought the BBC into disrepute with his actions - illegal or not. That is a sackable offence in any line of work.

I’d love to see that go to a tribunal.

[kumnio]

24 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

No. Purely, on the grounds, like all of us in any job, he has brought the BBC into disrepute with his actions - illegal or not. That is a sackable offence in any line of work.

Granted, Ive not followed this story, but signing up to OnlyFans is a sackable offence? Really?

If anyone is offended by that, they they need to get a grip on reality. The only cunts offended will no doubt be religious middle class English zealots who support Boris and co.

If this story is really about a depressed man looking at porn to feel better, its hardly newsworthy.

[scotlad]

7 hours ago, Alibi said:

Funny how police can get something like this done and dusted in a few days, but Police Scotland are still targeting the SNP over whatever it is they are hoping to find after more than 2 years with no charges.  You'd almost think that PS were trying to harm the indy movement and weren't actually carrying out a genuine investigation into a possible crime.  Throw into the mix that, if I am informed correctly, the complainant was Sean Clerkin, and it doesn't look at all suspicious. Be interesting to see how long they can spin it out.

Wings was hinting earlier on Twitter that the investigation could be reaching a head sooner rather than later.

[Ally Bongo]

10 minutes ago, scotlad said:

Wings was hinting earlier on Twitter that the investigation could be reaching a head sooner rather than later.

He seems rather excited so presumably there is going to be charges

[aaid]

From today’s Popbitch mailout.  For context Dan Wooton is a newsreader for GB News a former associate has put a detailed thread on Twitter about his activities while he was at the Sun and which were covered up by them.

The Sun have been having a hell of a time trying to retrofit a public interest to their Huw Edwards story, pulling up any old incident of workplace misconduct they can find to pin on him now that the police are saying there's no evidence of any crime.


It's a shame they've put themselves in this position because if all they wanted was a story about a news broadcaster who has made life uncomfortable for colleagues by sending them "inappropriate messages", they have a really juicy one much closer to home. It will involve asking some difficult questions, but they have an excellent starting lead. 


They should still have all of Dan Wootton's old HR files stashed away somewhere – so maybe they could start there? There's bullying allegations, NDAs - even a few pay-offs they could get the guys in finance to dredge back up. While they're doing that, they could look into why Wootton kept getting promoted while some of those who lodged complaints got sidelined.

Former colleagues seem perfectly willing to chat – but hey. We shouldn't be doing their job for them. Just start pulling at the thread. See what you find...

[aaid]

38 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

He seems rather excited so presumably there is going to be charges

Interesting bedfellows.  I wonder if Wings got the story from The Majority or vice versa, maybe they both have the same source close to the investigation which is very very interesting.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/uk-news/23653965.ultra-unionist-group-films-video-outside-nicola-sturgeons-house/

[TDYER63]

12 minutes ago, aaid said:

Interesting bedfellows.  I wonder if Wings got the story from The Majority or vice versa, maybe they both have the same source close to the investigation which is very very interesting.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/uk-news/23653965.ultra-unionist-group-films-video-outside-nicola-sturgeons-house/

 Scotland’s leading anti-nationalist media”,  Snort. If they are expecting an award thats another disappointment for them as they have some stiff competition. 

[Ally Bongo]

21 minutes ago, aaid said:

Interesting bedfellows.  I wonder if Wings got the story from The Majority or vice versa, maybe they both have the same source close to the investigation which is very very interesting.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/uk-news/23653965.ultra-unionist-group-films-video-outside-nicola-sturgeons-house/

Probably from WIngs as going on previous track records the couple that run "The Majority" are absolute fruitloop zoomers

To me, the only way there can possibly be charges is if there is fraud for personal gain

Just cannot see it from Sturgeon

[dan cake]

[PapofGlencoe]

On 7/13/2023 at 11:28 AM, TDYER63 said:

Lets see what happens. 

I have skelfs on my arse through sitting on the fence on this board, on this occasion I  have absolutely no qualms about speaking as I see things . If I am wrong so be it. It wont be the first or the last time. I am not harassing Huw Edwards I am simply saying it as I see it. I dont think we need all the facts to get a basic understanding of what has gone on. 
 
Whether something is illegal or not does not make it right.  If my 18 yr old child was sending pictures of themselves to a 61 yr old man I don’t think I would be quite so understanding. 

We are told that children’s brains do not fully develop till they are 25 . Paying young folk for pictures IMO is morally wrong, particularly when its a person of influence . If I am alone in my thinking so be it . 

couldn't agree more.

Have we really sunk this far that it's legality alone which people draw the line at?  

If my 18 year old was having a dangerous drug habit funded by a 60 odd year old who kept funding it despite being warned, I'd do everything to protect my child.  including potentially going to papers to have it stopped.  And that's what they are.. a vulnerable child.. agree wholeheartedly about the brain development.  

Without knowing all the facts but based on what's out there, I think the BBC and the Sun have acted as expected.  It's the individual that's done questionable deeds here from what I can gather, no-one else.

Edited July 14, 2023 by PapofGlencoe

[aaid]

1 hour ago, PapofGlencoe said:

Without knowing all the facts 

But I’m going to comment anyway. 

[PapofGlencoe]

5 minutes ago, aaid said:

But I’m going to comment anyway. 

that's generally how comments work yes, including yourself. 

it's fairly clear, at best, he's been asking and paying an 18 year old for sex pics.  as Mrs T says, we don't need all the facts to know that's not on.  

So no i do not take for read that "if something's legal it shouldn't be judged" line.  I simply don't agree with that concept at all.  We judge people doing legal but morally wrong things all the time.  This is no different and it serves a societal purpose, in my view.

[TDYER63]

1 hour ago, PapofGlencoe said:

couldn't agree more.

Have we really sunk this far that it's legality alone which people draw the line at?  

If my 18 year old was having a dangerous drug habit funded by a 60 odd year old who kept funding it despite being warned, I'd do everything to protect my child.  including potentially going to papers to have it stopped.  And that's what they are.. a vulnerable child.. agree wholeheartedly about the brain development.  

Without knowing all the facts but based on what's out there, I think the BBC and the Sun have acted as expected.  It's the individual that's done questionable deeds here from what I can gather, no-one else.

Thats how I see it . 

Thank you, I was beginning to think  I had turned into fookin Mary Whitehouse. I never thought I would see the day that an old guy paying a teenager for sex photos would get a shrug of the shoulders and nothing to see here attitude . I think I am pretty open minded but on any level this to me this is not right. 

If this is the way the world is going then I am glad I am closer to my way out than in. 

[duncan II]

1 hour ago, TDYER63 said:

Thats how I see it . 

Thank you, I was beginning to think  I had turned into fookin Mary Whitehouse. I never thought I would see the day that an old guy paying a teenager for sex photos would get a shrug of the shoulders and nothing to see here attitude . I think I am pretty open minded but on any level this to me this is not right. 

If this is the way the world is going then I am glad I am closer to my way out than in. 

My own opinion (whilst at the same time hating that I have an opinion on gossipy stuff) is along Pap of Glencoe and TDYER lines. For what it's worth.

[ger intae them]

On what is actually known here, this is close to being a non story.

if you get all tabloid, this is a massive story.

don’t sympathise with shuggie, but people going on about him being being a predator are fully immersed in modern blame culture……. get a grip. 

[Toepoke]

Jonathan Pie with an interesting take as always (NSFW so I waited til Saturday 😉 )...