lapal_fan Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 I'm so glad of being brought up in a bubble with no paedos, not knowing the first thing about drugs and only drinking very occasionally. Thanks mom and dad 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 3 hours ago, Davkaus said: As an aside, I do want to make the point that someone pleading guilty doesn't necessarily mean they are guilty due to our legal system's perverse approach to punishing people who maintain their innocence and rewarding people who plead guilty (see Andrew Malkinson), but I'm not sure I want to get into the weeds of that debate all day, especially in regards to noncing It's ridiculous to suggest someone is going to plead guilty to an offence of that nature, if in fact they are genuinely innocent. Andrew Malinkson didn't plead guilty, he was found guilty by a majority verdict of 10/2. I would imagine it's pretty difficult for anyone to give a reasonable explanation to having in your possession such horrific images. As for the scandal of plea bargains, it's par for the course in legal circles , usually aimed at those suspects getting legal aid, who are coerced into pleading guilty, on the assumption, by their own legal team, that they are guilty to begin with. I doubt very much Hew Edwards was getting legal aid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 (edited) 4 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said: Andrew Malinkson didn't plead guilty That was the **** point I also thought it was pretty clear that by referring to it as an aside in the context of the previous post that it was a more general point regarding the claim that a guilty plea ought to end all discussions of whether someone was in fact guilty. Edited July 31 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 1 minute ago, Davkaus said: That was the **** point But that's not how you phrased it. You said, "See Andrew Malinkson ". How is his case relevant to Hew Edwards. Malinkson pleaded not guilty. Hew Edwards pleaded guilty. So what was your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 35 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: I'm so glad of being brought up in a bubble with no paedos, not knowing the first thing about drugs and only drinking very occasionally. Thanks mom and dad Mom and dad only do so much the rest is up to you then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 (edited) 3 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said: But that's not how you phrased it. You said, "See Andrew Malinkson ". How is his case relevant to Hew Edwards. Malinkson pleaded not guilty. Hew Edwards pleaded guilty. So what was your point? That he spent several additional years in prison due to him refusing to admit his guilt, therefore a guilty plea does not necessarily end all discussion on whether someone is in fact guilty. I'll accept your point that it's something someone would perhaps be less likely to do in a case like this, but I was making a more general point in response to Demitri's point. Edited July 31 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 1 minute ago, Davkaus said: That he spent several additional years in prison due to him refusing to admit his guilt, therefore a guilty plea does not necessarily end all discussion on whether someone is in fact guilty. I'll accept your point that it's something someone would perhaps be less likely to do in a case like this, but I was making a more general point in response to Demitri's point. Someone pleading not guilty and maintaining their innocence is one thing. It's not like he changed his plea from guilty to not guilty. Edwards has pleaded guilty, so he's not innocent in anyway shape or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 22 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said: What a pair of tits Now, thats no way to speak about me and @Seat68 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lichfield Dean Posted July 31 VT Supporter Share Posted July 31 4 hours ago, sheepyvillian said: Someone pleading not guilty and maintaining their innocence is one thing. It's not like he changed his plea from guilty to not guilty. Edwards has pleaded guilty, so he's not innocent in anyway shape or form. I'm still kind of curious about the legal aspects of this. Edwards pleaded guilty because he received illegal images, therefore he's guilty of a crime. He also, apparently, deleted the images and asked for the sender to stop sending them. Now, deleting images because they were sent unsolicited is a plausible defence apparently, but even so, when a case like this goes to court is the defendant advised to plead guilty anyway (because they have received the image therefore have broken the law) and then let the court decide to throw out the case? Or is "not guilty" the right way to go because the defendant didn't solicit the images? I'm finding this all a bit confusing to be honest. Maybe somebody with more legal knowledge here can enlighten us about some of these aspects? Anyway, the fact Edwards stayed in contact with the guy after even a single image had been sent is enough for me to consider him a total scumbag who deserves everything he gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 6 minutes ago, Lichfield Dean said: I'm still kind of curious about the legal aspects of this. Edwards pleaded guilty because he received illegal images, therefore he's guilty of a crime. He also, apparently, deleted the images and asked for the sender to stop sending them. Now, deleting images because they were sent unsolicited is a plausible defence apparently, but even so, when a case like this goes to court is the defendant advised to plead guilty anyway (because they have received the image therefore have broken the law) and then let the court decide to throw out the case? Or is "not guilty" the right way to go because the defendant didn't solicit the images? I'm finding this all a bit confusing to be honest. Maybe somebody with more legal knowledge here can enlighten us about some of these aspects? Anyway, the fact Edwards stayed in contact with the guy after even a single image had been sent is enough for me to consider him a total scumbag who deserves everything he gets. You don't plead guilty if you're not, especially someone in the public eye such as Edwards. He was represented by Kings Council, he would have advised Edwards on where he stands in view of the law. There you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted July 31 Share Posted July 31 What were the actual charges he pleaded guilty to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 31 VT Supporter Share Posted July 31 18 minutes ago, ender4 said: What were the actual charges he pleaded guilty to? He plead guilty to 3 counts of making indecent images of children. The legal definition of 'making' is wider than the usual understanding of the word - what he has plead guilty to is basically accessing a number of indecent images (which includes video) of varying severity. He was sent 41 images by another man, amongst hundreds over a period of about a year, via WhatsApp, which included 7 considered the most serious, of which 2 they believe were of a young child. In his defence he has said asked not to be sent underage images, and later specifically asked not to be sent anything illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMelvillan Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 if you run with dogs you are gonna get fleas I have no sympathy for Edwards and care not for the intricacies and nuances of the case. Most of us would not find ourselves in this position because we would have never associated with the scumbag who sent him those images - let alone continue to associate with him after he were to sent the most grotesque media known to man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 so if you are on X randomly trawling though stuff and someone posts a video that is pornographic and you watch it and it turns out that video contained something illegal like underage sex .. are you liable for prosecution ? I'm not asking for a friend , just curious .. or does twitter not have stuff like that on its platform due to safeguards ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 6 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: so if you are on X randomly trawling though stuff and someone posts a video that is pornographic and you watch it and it turns out that video contained something illegal like underage sex .. are you liable for prosecution ? I'm not asking for a friend , just curious .. or does twitter not have stuff like that on its platform due to safeguards ? I guess scrolling past something publicly posted and being sent something specifically to you is the key difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 6 minutes ago, Genie said: I guess scrolling past something publicly posted and being sent something specifically to you is the key difference. both would be unsolicited though ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 (edited) 8 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: both would be unsolicited though ? One more innocent than the other but I get the point you’re making. If someone they actually knew sent them pictures versus them appearing on a twitter feed from someone they didn’t know. Edited August 1 by Genie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 On facebook a couple of weeks back I saw one of these jokes that said “whatever you do, don’t search for chicken soup”. Seemed a bit weird so I looked in the comments and lots of people did indeed search chicken soup out of curiosity. Apparently “chicken soup” was a sort of secret term for child material on facebook to help the scum locate it. When you search it now it throws up a warning to that effect, now those curious people are probably on a monitoring register. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 (edited) I would guess the problem is that most of us would be blocking the sender of said images and reporting him to the police, and so it’s pretty hard to argue that you weren’t in some way conflicted. The prosecution could argue that continuing the dialogue with someone distributing this stuff was a kind of signal of interest. And presumably some of the stuff being sent was legal but looked near enough the same as illegal stuff, and Huw wasn’t fussed about that. I don’t know. I agree with @Davkausthat people *do* plead guilty for crimes they haven’t committed (see Post Office scandal for example), often due to legal advice and sentencing incentives. At the same time, I’d be amazed if someone with Huw Edwards’ resources would be pleading guilty on a charge like this unless the evidence was damning in some way, because it’s such a horrendous charge to have next to your name, and surely an innocent person would want to fight. Very peculiar case, and the guilty plea probably means a lot of evidence will never really see the light of day. Maybe that’s a good thing for everyone tbh. End of the day, you can understand the worry people have about accidentally receiving something like this, but don’t think there have been many (any?) cases of someone getting convicted through sheer bad luck. Edited August 1 by KentVillan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted August 1 Share Posted August 1 The guy he shared the images with is also Welsh. Back in the good old days the dumbasses would have been rioting about the Welsh, but I guess that particular impulse has spread out to more diverse races. Still the same shit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts