The BBC’s Broadcasting Home in London, England, on July 10, 2023.
Vuk Valcic/Sopa Photographs | Lightrocket | Getty Photographs
LONDON — The BBC’s Huw Edwards has been named by his spouse because the TV anchor accused of paying a teen greater than £35,000 (round $45,430) in change for sexually specific images.
Based on a report in The Solar newspaper final week, citing the alleged sufferer’s mom, the funds are alleged to have began when their little one was 17 — they’re now 20.
After 5 crisis-ridden days for the British broadcaster, the spouse of the beforehand unnamed TV anchor launched a press release to the PA information company.
“In mild of the current reporting relating to the ‘BBC Presenter’ I’m making this assertion on behalf of my husband Huw Edwards, after what have been 5 extraordinarily troublesome days for our household,” Vicky Flind mentioned.
“I’m doing this primarily out of concern for his psychological well-being and to guard our youngsters … Huw is affected by critical psychological well being points. As is nicely documented, he has been handled for extreme melancholy lately.”
She added that her husband Edwards had “suffered one other critical episode and is now receiving in-patient hospital care.”
“As soon as nicely sufficient to take action, he intends to reply to the tales which were printed,” Flind added.
The story developed earlier this week, when the BBC reported {that a} lawyer for the younger particular person had contacted it to say that the allegations made by the latter’s mom had been “garbage” and that “nothing inappropriate or illegal” had occurred.
In a response to a request for touch upon the BBC’s story, The Solar referred CNBC to its present reporting on the topic and a earlier assertion issued by a spokesperson for the newspaper.
“We’ve got reported a narrative about two very involved dad and mom who made a grievance to the BBC concerning the behaviour of a presenter and the welfare of their little one,” the assertion mentioned.
“Their grievance was not acted upon by the BBC,” it added. “We’ve got seen proof that helps their issues. It is now for the BBC to correctly examine.”
Edwards was suspended and was taken off air after the information broke final week. New allegations concerning the anchor’s conduct from different people have continued to emerge since The Solar’s authentic story was printed on July 7.
BBC newsreader Huw Edwards
Chris Jackson | Chris Jackson Assortment | Getty Photographs
For its half, the BBC says it had “been requested to pause its investigations into the allegations whereas the Police scope future work.” On Wednesday afternoon, simply earlier than Edwards was named by his spouse, London’s Metropolitan Police reportedly concluded there was “no info to point {that a} prison offence has been dedicated.”
Timeline of main developments
The BBC directed CNBC to a timeline of occasions on its web site when contacted for remark.
In response to the complainant getting in contact with BBC Viewers Providers on Could 19, the BBC says its Company Investigations Crew made an evaluation “that on the idea of the knowledge supplied it didn’t embody an allegation of criminality, however nonetheless merited additional investigation.”
The BBC mentioned it tried to contact the complainant in Could and June, however didn’t obtain a response.
The Solar then approached the broadcaster on July 6. Based on the BBC, the paper’s claims “contained new allegations” and it was on this present day that the TV anchor was made conscious of them.
The BBC made contact with the complainant and police on July 7, with affirmation of the anchor’s suspension approaching July 9.
Hypothesis and the legislation
The experiences had led to intense hypothesis on social media about who the anchor was, with various high-profile BBC stars publicly distancing themselves from the allegations because of this.
Alongside the gravity of the allegations being made, there are additionally probably critical penalties in the case of legal guidelines on defamation and privateness.
“People who put up allegations about any particular person, together with the BBC presenters whose names have been related to these allegations, do face private legal responsibility for these posts,” Matthew Gill, a senior affiliate and media disputes lawyer at London-based legislation agency Howard Kennedy, instructed CNBC.
“And if these posts had been to trigger BBC presenters reputational harm and the allegations had been discovered to be unfaithful — both in relation to the presenter on the middle of this, or others who don’t have any connection to it — the one that tweets these tweets, or posts these posts on social media … might face authorized motion,” he added.
They could additionally, Gill defined, “be ordered to pay important damages and prices.”
“Now, the fact is that a person is unlikely to face authorized proceedings in the event that they tweet the identify of a star as soon as on-line in relation to those allegations,” he mentioned. This was as a result of, “frankly, so many individuals have posted these kinds of allegations on-line over the previous few days.”
“Nevertheless, the celebrities who should not related to … these allegations however have been linked to it on-line would possibly take into account bringing proceedings, for instance, in opposition to the primary individuals to have talked about their identify on-line,” Gill mentioned.
They may additionally take motion “in opposition to individuals who have determined to determine a marketing campaign of attempting to hyperlink the incorrect presenters to those allegations.”