Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

BBC presenter Huw Edwards suspended over paying for sexual pics.

Not paid much attention to it, but seems the mother asked the BBC to make him stop as the money was funding her child's crack habit, the BBC didn't so she went to the scum. Of course cutting off funds to a crack addict doesn't stop them being a crack addict, but you can see why she'd be desperate for this person to stop shoveling cash at her kid.
 
The Sun is hardly a stout defender of public morals, it's just that its editorial staff know that scandal sells copy.
As for whether a crime had been committed as it? Regardless of whether or not 17 is an adult it is above the age of sexual consent.
Has a prosecuteable crime been committed if there was no coercion involved?
 
The Sun is hardly a stout defender of public morals, it's just that its editorial staff know that scandal sells copy.
As for whether a crime had been committed as it? Regardless of whether or not 17 is an adult it is above the age of sexual consent.
Has a prosecuteable crime been committed if there was no coercion involved?


Encouraging under 18's to create and send sexual pics is a crime, child pornography.
 
The Sun is hardly a stout defender of public morals, it's just that its editorial staff know that scandal sells copy.
As for whether a crime had been committed as it? Regardless of whether or not 17 is an adult it is above the age of sexual consent.
Has a prosecuteable crime been committed if there was no coercion involved?
I suspect whomever it was didn't fork out over 30k out of infatuation.


Think the Mum did the right thing. Though think the daughter is the one most likely looking gaol time. The celeb is just looking for a new career
 
I can’t find evidence of this happening. Just that Chris Moyles made some creepy remarks.
These things did happen. They did the same to Emma Watson.

Some of the Sun's comments about 'models'/victims approaching 16 in the 1980's we're literally as awful as 'and from Thursday you can see her nipples!!' and the poor woman becoming more and more scantily clad as the days passed 🤮

Chris Moyles did make some terrible comments about Church and her approaching legality 🤮

I'm sure if you Trawl Reddit or Press reader these articles or JPGs oh the pants could be found.

I recall someone saying that the phrase to search for on the Daily Mail website is 'all grown up' to find this kind of article 🤮🤮🤮
 
These things did happen. They did the same to Emma Watson.

Some of the Sun's comments about 'models'/victims approaching 16 in the 1980's we're literally as awful as 'and from Thursday you can see her nipples!!' and the poor woman becoming more and more scantily clad as the days passed 🤮

Chris Moyles did make some terrible comments about Church and her approaching legality 🤮

I'm sure if you Trawl Reddit or Press reader these articles or JPGs oh the pants could be found.

I recall someone saying that the phrase to search for on the Daily Mail website is 'all grown up' to find this kind of article 🤮🤮🤮
I’m not defending News International but I wanted to read more on it and found this article which suggests it didn’t happen:

 
The Sun is hardly a stout defender of public morals, it's just that its editorial staff know that scandal sells copy.
As for whether a crime had been committed as it? Regardless of whether or not 17 is an adult it is above the age of sexual consent.
Has a prosecuteable crime been committed if there was no coercion involved?

my understanding (not that i've had cause to check recently) is that the age of consent is generally 16 (although there are some exceptions if older is in a 'position of authority' over younger) but 'indecent' images of someone under 18 are illegal, and things like online dating sites only allow people 18+ - it's not unknown for people younger to lie about their age on them.

in this case, if it had involved actual sexual acts in person it would probably have been legal, if it had involved exchanging indecent pictures or sexual acts via webcam then it would probably have been an offence.

without going in to the moral angle or whether either would be a good idea, that does seem slightly illogical.

and in the specifics, it does seem a bit of a coincidence that a tory tabloid chooses to put this story out there the day after certain (unproven and potentially libellous) claims in an e-mail about a former senior tory get out there...
 
Can't see CPS going for that if they met through onlyfans
I think they would try if it were high profile enough. The case/person, I mean.

The OFans link is only a suggestion/might be at this point. I'm sorry I mentioned it upthread, now. I've woken up to find people discussing it like it might be fact.

It just seemed to be plausible, is all.
 
I’m not defending News International but I wanted to read more on it and found this article which suggests it didn’t happen:

Not a clock but the the language used in the preceding weeks amounted to the same is my understanding of the situation in relation to Church specifically.

As for the others, especially the page 3 shit in the 80s, that I recall better. Same with the Daily Fail.

I've just woken so I'm not going googling all this shite now.
 
Last edited:
In America the age of consent is a state thing, looks like a patchwork quilt of the different legal ages. Wonder how that works in practice, legally etc.
 
I’m not defending News International but I wanted to read more on it and found this article which suggests it didn’t happen:


Seems to be evidence of The Star doing it with Natalie Banus and Sunday Sport with Linsey Dawn Mckenzie.
 
Urban75 posters being more restrained than Twitter posters in terms of speculation.
If I was paying 10% of 6figure salary to someone to keep me in work. I'd consider keeping tabs on people putting out career ending liables as part of their job...
 
To be fair, the child/adult distinction in this country is a bit fucked up - you can have a job, pay tax, and live away from 'home' at 16, but not vote until 18 - you can be married at 16 to another 16yo, and have children and a house with them, but if they send you an underwear shot from the dressing room at bravissimo you could be sent to prison for possessing sexual images of a child.

It's hardly conducive to everyone knowing where the boundaries are.


‘Kin hell …
 
Back
Top Bottom