14 Comments

The claim that BBC journalists weren’t informed is not technically accurate, as Deborah Turness - BBC News CEO was informed.

The BBC appears to have committed a terrible series of own goals.

Expand full comment
author

I stand by the last sentence of my piece as an accurate summary. All BBC journalists would have regarded Turness as a manager.

Expand full comment

I follow Lord Billingshurst’s point but I agree with Joshua that on the basis of what has been reported that SEEMS unlikely.

Expand full comment
Aug 2·edited Aug 2

Hello Joshua,

May I please ask. The BBC DG stated the police asked the arrest to be kept confidential? I do not quite understand this. How can this be? The BBC were Huw’s employers. They are not subject to police investigation and there was no reporting on this matter? The open justice system was ignored and the BBC is using the police as an excuse for not releasing any details. The police haven’t said anything, there were no reporting restrictions. What is this about?

Expand full comment
author

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to any of these questions. It's possible the BBC felt it was acting in accordance with the duty it owed its employee — not least because Edwards was said to be in poor health.

Expand full comment

Quite right, Joshua, if I may say so.

Expand full comment

He would have been dismissive if the BBC knew he had been charged!

Really?

Not convicted, just charged?

Does anyone else see a problem there?

Expand full comment
author

You bet. A compromise might have been to suspend him without pay.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Joshua. In terms of clarification, “-sentencing” rather than “-sentence” scarcely helps, as I see it.

Expand full comment
author

Indeed. But I thought I ought to correct it.

Expand full comment

Why describe the September hearing as a “PRE- sentence” hearing? Are there issues to be adjudicated upon perhaps after evidence and legal argument since there has been a basis of plea unacceptable to the prosecution and/or the Court? Otherwise is the case to be resolved following upon the provision of a pre-sentence report, as would be the normal process? Am I missing something?

Expand full comment

Might it be that the Chief Magistrate has reserved the right to commit Edwards to the Crown Court for sentencing if he feels his powers are insufficient? Perhaps he needs additional information before making that decision.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, that had occurred to me. But it seemed unlikely from what we knew about the case and I wasn't completely sure about the legal position. So I decided not to mention it.

Expand full comment
author

Good question. A well-informed reader tells me that the CPS may have got this wrong. Incidentally, the term used in the CPS announcement was "pre-sentencing", not "pre-sentence" as I originally wrote.

Expand full comment