Family and Friends Forum

I think it's extremely unjust that as he is 'famous' that the article written about him explains that making can entail just clicking a link.

It states the following:

According to the CPS website, "making indecent images can have a wide definition in the law and can include opening an email attachment containing such an image, downloading one from a website, or receiving one via social media, even if unsolicited and even if part of a group.”

That has been copied and pasted from the article. I would bet a large sum of money that any articles about our loved ones would NEVER ever go into detail explaining the ways in which the images could have come to be in the person's possession. Local 'news' outfits would label them, use negative wording as clickbait and just ignore tbe backlash that occurs.

Just because he is already known and has money doesn't mean he is any different and he does not deserve any special treatment. Yet another unfair element of this whole journey.

I guess with him being so high profile there are bigger implications of 'making' being interpreted differently. Generally the BBC will use less emotive language. I really do feel that it will take more high profile and well respected people to be found in this situation and for the reporting to inturn be less emotive and more informative, for the narrative to change and for people to become more knowledgeable about these offences and how they can be committed.

Post deleted by user

I really hope his family are here and can feel supported.



i also think it's brilliant that his case is being reported in a more detailed way as to explaining the law such as "making". I really hope this helps to educate others.

I also hope that this whole thing allows for greater public discussion as to how this behaviour can be stopped (be it by the internet companies being regulated or by giving those who have done such things a way to seek treatment without being prosecuted).

I feel so so sorry for his family.



xx

Post deleted by user

I have seen some online comments where a lot of people do not know that even at 17 it is still iioc, despite the legal age of consent for sex is 16. So on a way this is educating more people on the difference and I hope will lead to prevention.

I am not sure if what was found was related to the initial 17 year old that triggered the investigation.

In a way it annoys me that he got charged quite quickly. Majority wait years...I wonder if it was fast tracked because of his media status. But maybe it was because there was little to find? Either way it is never nice to see anyone being smeared over the media.

I'm actually really pleased they went into detail about how charges could come about. It's about time this was reported accurately and whilst it may seem unfair compared to 'our people', it will hopefully educate some others

I feel quite bitter that he got charged so quickly.

We've been waiting for over 2 years now and no outcome yet.

Yeah I feel really strongly about this too. I think we keep being thrown to the bottom of the pile as our kids are older and my OH is deemed very low risk. Although I totally recognise it's better for us than it is for families who are living apart during this sh!tshow, we cannot carry this on forever and it's still putting enormous pressure on our family

I think that's quite area dependent too. It took around 7/8 months for us to get charges. I wonder which police force it's under. Someone looked recently at all the different areas and the average time and posted the results, you might be able to search for it

Huw Edwards was the topic of conversation around the lunch table today at my parents. All the comments and opinions coming out and they don't know about my person yet.

Made me feel quite strange knowing that I know and what they think of that kind of person. The blankets judgement is so real and so scary for me.

I dread the day they find out.

I feel so sorry for Huw Edwards wife and family this journey is hard enough without the additional media coverage that this is going to attract.

I actually felt quite pleased that the statement from the CPS was included in the report because hopefully this will help people realise that this is not black and white and that it could happen to any family.

I agree that comments about this are very difficult to deal with- we have an upcoming family event and I'm pretty sure that the topic will be discussed then in general terms but certain people will be very judgmental ( nobody in the family apart from my OH and other son know anything about our situation)if I could avoid going then I would but as I've not been present on a few occasions now it would arouse suspicion if I don't go.

I think if it does happen then I will simply state that my opinion has always been to rehabilitate and educate rather than punish and that you look at the person rather than the crime and they can then make of that whatever they choose.

I saw a report about this today which was very measured with no name calling . The article reported that the court has requested low coverage to ensure a fair first hearing this week. Normally these cases don't hit the media until after the first plea hearing . My thoughts are with all the victims in this story.

I just seen this this morning , the detail they gave is how rvery media outlet should report but I think it's terrible that us normal people get the back lash from the media by NOT going into detail , this ruined my families life when local media reported the situation they deliberately left so much out and left it to the public to paint a picture in their own minds od the situation when they could have said so much more like they have on this post then they would have seen that my family member was not seeking this out or downloading sending and sharing any images now he has to live his life with thoughts and feelings out there that just aren't true about him the media are a massive problem when it comes to these type of offenses because they categorise everyone the same when images are found on devices if they are going to report the cases then they should report every detail about thr case and not only the parts the deem fit , it's hard enough after the knock but my biggest fear after that the KNOCK was the MEDIA !!!!!! they are allowed to report yes. .but they are biased and they add to ruining families lives and that's just my personal thoughts and feelings

Anxious Girl - my immediate thought also x

I may be completely wrong with this and being simplistic but from reading the description of what counts as an offence I understand that I or my children can be sent a link from anyone. We can open it and even though it was not requested and ask not to be sent those kind of links again, we are instantly guilty and face prison.

So I've seen this reported on itv news yesterday and today. Maybe Lucy Faithfull should step in and contact itv news and info them of facts!. He's been charged with " making" a number of iioc cat a to c. As most of us know the wording is misleading and making refers to possession. The news channels are saying he faces 10 years in prison!!. That is not the case according to the sentence guidelines. Yes he could face prison and my partner who had thousands of iioc was told this but definately not 10 years!. My OH got a suspended sentence and unpaid work. This is why the media need educating on these crimes! By saying he faces 10 years and it's making iioc it whips up the public into a frenzy!

And also as I've said all along how can someone be reported if they are on the sex offenders register?. Their name and address are usually printed yet the SOR is supposed to be confidential yet they can have " freedom of press"?

I have no clue - That is exactly right. I suspect if there was evidence to support that you were sent images unsolicited it might not come to a charge or would be considered in sentencing. I'm so cautious online now with links, downloads and I've changed settings on many things, such as not being able to be added to WhatsApp groups in the person adding me isn't a contact, not downloading images automatically from messaging apps.

I too am so cautious of everytjing I make sure my family member is always aware of what he can and cannot do as he is still allowed to have a phone with Internet access on his device , he is low risk , probation barely comes out to see him , again he was defisent a link was read out in court yet he was subjected to worse by the MEDIA !!! yes it warrants a change thag these were retrieved from phone but had been deleted when recieved ..they need to investigate more and this is all true not just what I want to believe to make it easier on myself his world and ours was torn apart by the media this crime is so sad for the innocent children in these images or videos but more needs to be done to stop them beinf so freely shared etc irs only getting worse, in my local area it's every other week something is being reported and families are being destroyed

This must be hell for his poor family.



Yes it is annoying that he seems to have got this far quickly when most of us have to wait years... but I think the fact he is famous will act against him as he'll probably be made an example of and get a severe sentence.

I heard about this earlier too.

I just hope his family get the support they need too, it's shocking how we as innocent victims of the person who has done the iioc get treated as if we also did it.

In my case it was a total and utter shock and I haven't been able to trust any words that come out of his mouth since then. (But this is me and my feeling).

I always find when media present information like this they always seem to focus on certain information and not the whole topic and this could have been a chance for them to express how many people are actually affected by this daily, or what support is avaliable to people who feel they need help and support. But alot of times, they seem to write in a way to cause more issues to those and it's usually us the family members who suffer not the person who has done the issues.

*sorry for rant*

Post deleted by user

The thing is the media are going to whip it into a frenzy. I still don't understand why they are saying he could face 10 years in prison. That is factually incorrect. Yes if he actually took the original photos he could but he didn't. He's been charged with possession. This is why I think organisations like LF should step in. It sends out a worrying message to all those families now who are waiting for sentencing

Louise49, if you look at the sentencing council website, the maximum sentence for iioc is 10 years. For what he seems to have been charged with I think the high end of the range would actually be 3 years, but the media can report 10 because it's a theoretical maximum, even if in actuality it would never come to that.

This will bring back the trauma for many of us,although responsible reporting may have more balanced information. It would be positive for a more balanced article to be written about the descent into online pornography & the addiction. Maybe something about how the LFF supports families & loved ones. But would it run the risk of our site being trolled?
My son is back in court on 16th,so I really hope local media do not link it to Huw Edwards.

The whole HUW Edwards's case has stirred up so many emotions in me that I had buried, or thought I had .. I feel physically sick and disgusted. I'm angry at myself for not speaking up..

I am still coming to terms with finding out someone close to me did something similar... not with the 17 year old boy .. but indecent images of young girls 10-13 .. on their phone ..

I can't keep this secret any longer , for my own sanity .. sorry this is my first post im im struggling to find the right words ..any supportive comments would be welcome ..

Please ring the LFF helpline to talk through your feelings. They are wonderful.

The helpline is incredibly helpful. Definitely a good idea to call them. I'm sure a lot of us on here understand the emotions it has stirred up and are feeling them too.

This has triggered all kinds of emotions for me and my heart goes out to his family who have to suffer the inevitable media frenzy.

I have avoided watching the news or looking at the papers today and my son who has been doing so well has been very quiet and withdrawn today as a result it all.

I really hope that LFF do put out some kind of statement regarding how easy it is for people to become involved in these offences, how it is not black and white and how they provide support to families.

It's just occurred to me that Huw's family could be reading this forum as they are as much in need of support and understanding as we are.

With how the media are reporting this, with some outlets taking the time to explain what making is and how it came to be on his WhatsApp, I feel this is a prime opportunity the media could provide greater advice to those who might face similar situation.

From what I have read, it essentially implies he was talking to someone (not clear if in a group chat) and exchanging mostly legal stuff, but was sent iiocs that were not requested. He had asked for these to not be sent but didn't report.

Reports suggest the iiocs span over two years, implying he had more than one opportunity to report. Unfortunately many do not report for many reasons, one I believe is the shame and fear of what the police and others would think. To report many fear they will need to disclose to loved ones that they have been talking to others in a sexual manner.

So many just delete and move on, but the law doesn't take kindly to this. I see so many here who have people in their lives that never asked or opened such material.

There needs to be better education that it is the right thing to do to report, and if done promptly and evidence that it wasn't requested then the person impacted should not face any consequences.

Continuig to Engage with people who have sent Iioc I believe in the eyes of the law is a big red flag, and rightly so. There needs to be a building in confidence for those to feel safe in reporting when they get unsolicited Iioc. I fear too many just ignore and hide it away, not realising it will get them in trouble if found out. But as I said, there is societal shame with engaging with strangers online for sexual gratification.

I think the issue with this and reporting is so many people would see this stuff and think oh I'm staying out of that as its not me that's doing the wrong thing and thinking that's enough. Which I think if were honest most of us would think.



Nobody will put their neck on the line to change these laws because of how the public see them and I truly believe all this does is take away from the real crime, the real issues and the real dangers to children. This is something I don't know you could ever really understand if you havent gone through this though.



I'm not saying my person or others on here are innocent or guilt free, I just think there's a difference between intentional harm or desire and situational harm. Repair the leak don't just tap over the holes. bad way to put it but I'm sure you all get me haha

I have seen a good article mentioning LFF and the impact it has on wives and families. It's quite sympathetic towards Huws wife and kids. I won't post the link (I'm hyper vigilant of links now). It is in the telegraph. They even describe how the narrative has changed which at first was "as a cringeworthy old fool paying a 17yr old for explicit pictures rather than a 62-year old paying for pictures of the abuse of a child".

I still don't think people realise it doesn't matter whether you asked for the photos or if you knew about them. If there is any chance someone has sent you images of an under 18 in a WhatsApp even if you delete, because at that point whether you wanted them or not....you have IOC on your phone.

I agree with others there needs to be more awareness and ability/willingness to report the senders and accidental/unsolicited stuff. It feels like LFF and the police are fighting a losing battle, it's too easy for it to be shared and too hard to get it removed and sadly this forum just makes you realise how widespread it is. I'm not condoning what the offenders have done, that it isn't wrong, or that they weren't responsible/at fault/should have known better but we need to protect children more by getting rid of this stuff off the internet and stopping it spreading. Because whatever we've got isn't working. It's not enough. It should not be a taboo to report and people shouldn't fear reporting in fear of being caught/accused for coming across it.

The press are crucifying him - I just hope he doesn't kill himself … is that what they want ? We were so lucky not to be in the press and my husband downloaded 5000- much worse than Huw Edwards. His offence is quite low but no one understands that. And why should his employer sack him on arrest? He might have been innocent . And talk of losing his pension is awful. My husband (and Huw) are good people who did bad things . There should be a second chance and right to rehabilitate if they are sorry. Poor man and family .

Plus this is very triggering … I had been in a good place for ages but this nonstop in the press with people talking about it while I live "a lie" by not disclosing feels very surreal and I feel a bit guilty

Post deleted by user

What has struck me about the reporting on this case is that originally the BBC reports were quite factual, straight forward and non-sensational but gradually they have become more emotive and condemning, as if they feel that it is necessary to fall into the tabloid stereotype for reporting on these crimes. I have only looked at BBC reports - I do not want to see the mass hysteria from the tabloids.

Why should the man have been sacked before he was charged - the law in this country is innocent until found guilty!

I really feel for his family, and, yes, for him as well.

I have refrained from posting on this thread just for my own personal opinions however when someone who I am lucky to have as a friend on here is reported for having her own opinion and is them made to feel like she is wrong is unjust

We all have ended up here through no fault of our own, we navigate as best as we can, here is the one place where not one of is is judged but a support group where we can be open and honest as much as without giving our personal details as this is an open forum

Its not about condoning the offending

This journey is not black or white

It's not making excuses for the behaviour of our loved ones,

As those who have been at the receiving end of the whole media experience we know how much it is misleading

When my sons case hit the media I wanted to post on the police FB page how much they twisted what they reported to what his charges were, so for me the BBC reported the facts on his offending yet now its turned in to.a frenzy

Society needs to be more aware of just how available this content is

For me I am far more understanding not condoning of this journey, x

And I do not for one moment forget the victims

Post deleted by user

Post deleted by user