He hasn't clarified anything because he's expressing his freedom of speech and that's all he does. That does not mean he knows what he's talking about !
Good morning to you. A delightful walk with you. I enjoyed the information muchly. Clear as usual and the actual written words helped. The nod to the place where the guidelines are was most welcome. Basset sounds like a fair chap, one of only a few I have heard of sadly. Thank you. 😊.
Appreciate your calm and sober assessment. Part of me wonders had he been a more ordinary person perhaps he'd be jailed? Lovely scenery too, by the way.
Very interesting breakdown, Al. I also love your videos and often recognise where you are, having lived in Cornwall over twenty years ago. It’s very beautiful and I miss scrambling breathlessly around Carn Brae.
Sam Melia got 2 years for putting stickers on lampposts and he is not allowed to live with his children ever again because the judge said he is a bad influence on them. One of Sam’s children is only a few months old. And since all the children live with their mother, that means Sam cannot move back in with his wife when he gets out of prison.
I really enjoyed this video. Although I live in Canada, I find your explanation on sentencing guidelines a fascinating topic in your part of the world. I should add that I have watched and enjoyed so many of your talks and will continue to do so!
I was asked to make a prediction about Mr Edwards a few days ago, and given he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and the lengths his barrister went to try and make out good character, I went with three months suspended for 2 years. Extended probation requirements. 10 years on the sex offenders register.
Talking continuously on a technical subject whilst walking briskly over undulating terrain must deserve UA-cam recognition of some form! Brilliant! The "other man" got one year custody suspended for two years for distributing so one would expect Edwards' KC to argue for something less onerous. I am surprised the possible sentences do not include a substanial fine, reflecting the lucretive commercial aspect given the conspiratorial nature of a crime where indecent images are traded. During lockdown organising a snowball fight attracted a £10,000 fine, which by all reports would be pocket money for Huw Edwards.
Things like the Proceeds of Crime Act allow for the recovery of money that was made by criminal activity. It's not a fine because it's not punishment; it's just saying that the criminal has no legitimate right to the money, so it's being taken away.
@@beeble2003 With respect Huw Edwards salary and his forthcoming very generous pension are not the proceeds of crime. It would be widely agreed that he systematically used his wealth and position to exploit others with less wealth and no voice to object. That seems to include work colleagues as well as exploited children. He should have known better. As an intelligent adult he knew the circumstances under which these images where produced. He is a father and was a husband yet he has shown no remorse when brought to court holding his head high. A reasonable conclusion is that he is morally bankrupt. Maybe he should be made financially bankrupt too.
@@nickdawson9270 I never suggested that Edwards' salary and pension are the proceeds of crime. You were the one who introduced the idea of a fine as a possible sentence, based on the possibility of making money by trading images, and that's the point I was addressing. Since there is no suggestion that Edwards ever sold images, it seemed clear to me that we were discussing general sentencing policy, not the specifics of this case.
@robertstallard7836 Maybe not send people to prison for drug offences if they are not dealing/stealing, treat it as a medical issue and free up loads of spaces.
@robertstallard7836and putting people in prison is generally a bad long term strategy. As far as we know he was sent a handful of illegal images out of hundreds of images sent to him, we have no idea if he asked for them or saw them. Putting him in prison so he is in contact with others, is likely to increase offending.
Thanks. I had not previously understood the criteria for a suspended sentence. Given that there is no further revealing of evidence through the trial process, I guess the only reliable background will come from the judge's summary at sentencing.
Very few cases are reported in the news, they pick the ones where they don't get sent to prison because they want you outraged. Protecting him in prison would be expensive and they can't really do any kind of rehabilitation in prison. He might get a tag, he might have to take lie detector tests, the police will go through his phones, computers etc regularly. It would actually be easier for him in prison.
Thanks for that breakdown - always surprises me just how much 'legal info' you folks can store in your head! Hope he's not treated as some kind of 'celebrity' - and that possibly the photographs can be traced to the victims to give them the support that they'll need. It makes my blood boil.... Always enjoy where you record/film your videos (and the titbits of history you give with it) Loved the part where you got a bit too far down along the bracken - was half expecting you to stop and say "Now, where DID I park the car?" 😆
I really love walking. I do tend to Zen out a bit though. So it's not uncommon for me to suddenly come to and not have the first clue where I am or how I got there. And I do walk down a lot of dead ends, like the sea or a cliff top.
@@artmedialaw Have to admit, it did get a bit worrying when you were going through that bracken - just incase your foot got caught on a piece and you fell over! I'd not get 10yards if I tried walking and filming, I'd be flat on my face. It's really interesting learning some of the history of where you're at, nice one!
"Hope he's not treated as some kind of 'celebrity'" Well, I didn't notice any part of the sentencing guidelines that say celebrities get lower sentences...
We have had a couple of Sentencing Acts 2020 and 2022 which we don't appear to have had in the past. Does this change the sentencing guidelines by Act of Parliament and undermine the work of the sentencing council?
Thank ypu, very interesting and illuminating. I can imagine there could be a (media inspired) backlash against such a perceived lenient sentence. Is there provision for a harsher sentence in cases with such a high profile offender? My thinking is that there could be created (nudged) a link between public profile and moral responsibility. Whether or not justified, there is certainly a prevailing attitude that those who have money or are 'connected' get more leniency and to some extent that could be mitigated.
God forgive me, but when I saw the words on your thumbnail I immediately sang them to "What's New Pussycat". "What's Huw looking at? Woh-oo-woh-oo-wohwoh"
Will he be put on the sex offenders register as a matter of course or is that part of the sentencing process. Loved the walk and thanks for another great episode.
If you end up on the register and how long you're on for is linked to what sentence you get. But for these offences even if it's a non custodial he'd have to register. (There isn't actually a register as such; it's just how we describe certain notification requirements)
When i see u walking i keep thinking that naked gun scene of frank walking and talking to himself and the end he is out of the city and then thinks....where the hell am i lol😅
Thanks for your efforts in educating us about the law which is very confusing at times. Also is it possible and sometimes done that a judge can impose a sentence outside of the guidelines. Tell our friend at BBB that the backdrop to your videos are a lot better and more interesting than the inside of his man cave ha ha. Thanks John
Is there nothing that would take into account Mr Edwards' (now former) position in society as an aggravating feature? For example I would expect a serving policeman to get a tougher sentence for the same crime than as regular person due to them holding a position where they should be setting an example
Always doubt the remorse bit. Is it real remorse or just feel bad because they got caught. For most crimes you wouldn't do it in the first place if you actually felt remorse.
My understanding of the USA Federal giidelines (from having read a number of appellate court decisions on.challenges to sentences) is the US system is somewhat similar: the guidelines are advisory only; jufges still retain discretion to depart upwards and downwards. The starting points are computation of the "criminal history" (first conviction starts at lowest, repeat aggravating felonies are higher). Each offense has a base offense level in points. Then the guidelines have enhancments (add points) for a number of acts or in the case here the number of images add points, and mitigating factors)reduce points (such as for acceptance of responsibilty (plead guilty and additional minus for exceptional acceptance like made restitution before sentencing or conviction). The guidelines range is read off a chart by reading up the criminal history column and horizontally across based upon the points. This is usually a range in months & type of custody (probation or prison). The judge can depart upwards beyond the range (but not above a statutory maximum) or downeards (not sure if can depart below a statutory minimum as in felon in possession of a firearm - very common 60 months min consecutive to everything else). The types of conduct you discussed here - possession, production and distribution - might be chargable as separate offenses and having done all three would result in a separate sentences which the judge might be able to run consecutively or might be concurrent. And such an offender of the conduct described herein would be subject to a period of post'release supervised release. It could be 10 years with restrictions on smart drvice & internet use. As I understand supervised release a warrant is not tequired to search the releasee 's residence, car, computer, etc. on a theory that the convict is STILL in custody = essensially in prison.. And being registered under the SORNA (s*xll offenders registry & notice act) is for life.
Love it up there. I keep hoping to find an arrowhead. But so far the only sharp bit of flint I've found was the one that took out my tyre on the way up there. (Note the rather conspicuous spare wheel on my truck)
You need to do a series on the sentencing guidelines breaking down each category. These guidelines need urgent revision. For instance treating 17 year old murderers as 'children'. My son was murdered by a 17 year old. He suffered a hard death - tortured and stabbed at least 128 times and finally suffocated on soil. There is a huge difference in maturity between a 11 year old and 17 year old yet they are treated the same. And this stupid guideline was the catalyst for the riots organised by the professional thugs. Only recently a judge used this guideline to protect the identities of two little darlings who viciously murdered a man. If they had been identified it would have affected their futures. Wot a shame! And no thought for the victim's family. After all the system is all in favour of the offender. Then you can start on the mental health card so beloved by forensic psychiatrists and the 'process' that is held behind closed doors. But I doubt you will.
Sorry this happened to you. That is awful. Most of the time, it is personality traits that lead to the offence and re-offending This doesn't mean they don't understand what they are doing. Legal insanity should be quite rare because they would have to either not be aware of what they were doing and/or they don't understand the consequences of their actions (it is nothing to do with thier moral jusification or lack of). Diminished responsibility is a guilty plea, unlike insanity is where they understand what they are doing and the consequences, but their reasons for doing were clouded by mental strain. This is controversial because there would need to be evidence of this prior and not just during, and they would likely not be able to forsee other options. Example domestic violence victim who was being controlled, coerced and isolated and fear not being able to leave. It is complicated because it can't simply be someone who wanted to get back at their partner/family for the abuse they received although in other cases the mental torment if them doing it to someone else may cloud judgement especially if they fear they will get away with it.
@@paulthomas8262 Thank you for your reply. Re my son's murder. He was the first victim ( they did not know one another- first date met online ) and only victim thankfully given the killer had 4 more potential victims lined up. It was premediated and given a hefty 24 years sentence by the judge. This was overruled by psychiatrists who, under cross examination, had no idea ( despite having the killer under their charge for months before the trial they kept delaying) of any of the facts in essence. Yet within 2 hours of sentencing had the killer transferred back to the medium secure hospital as they had conveniently diagnosed the killer with the usual paranoid schizophenia after the murder. It amazes me that the killer could torture and murder my son then go home to live with the family, start to plan the next murder, display no symptons of PS and continue the same modus operandi that the killer used on my son. Yet the psychiatrists could only reply to counsel that it was down to the PS. Psychiatrists can never be wrong. And just look at the people they release eg Gavin Collins. But they are never held accountable.I have no faith in our justice system. That bed could be used for a person with a genuine mental illness and which costs the taxpayer at least 200k per annum. My son's killer should be in prison.
@sensemaya1 that is hard. I take an interest in this subject. Mental illness alone is not enough to get an insanity verdict IMO. Schizophrenic people can plan, the culpability is not simple, it is not a case of they have it therefore they are criminally insane. Of course psychiatrist make mistakes, and they don't all agree.
I think what you are saying is he didn't get a hospital order but was diagnosed as a prisoner. I'd that is the case his sentence should remain. He might get transferred to a secure unit but should return to the serve in prison as soon as that is managed. Only appeal should commute the sentence. IMO. Unless there is no minimum term. The opposite of that is where there is no maximum term. Where offenders of minority or medium offences spend years in prison essentially forgotten. This was Jack Straws biggest mistake. It doesn't exist anyone, but there are still people in prison with this.
now all they have to do is find a community that wants the services of a nonce for 200 hrs. Seriously, how inappropriate is community service for this kind of offense
Good evening to you. My second comment here because I have a concern. I believe a genuine one. And I like clear bboundaries.A scenario first and then two questions. I set my WhatsApp toggle so that no image sent to me is automatically sent to my Galleries file. Unsolicited someone sends me, via WhatsApp, an illegal image. It will be visible to me immediately I open the message but not before. I have no warning of it's contents. Q1. Because the image has not been transferred to my devices 'hard drive' am I (legally) in possession of the image? It remains on an App and not on my device. Q2. As it was unsolicited and out of my control what should I do? Go to the police and explain? I can envisage this being used as 'revenge' or in a child custody scenario. Best regards. 😊.
Apparently, one of the Conservative leadership candidates, Kemi Badenoch, when asked on live tv what was the naughtiest thing she’d done, she admitted that she’d hacked Harriet Harman’s website. Apparently, Harman’s username and password were “Harriet” and “Harman” so it was a lucky guess as opposed to a sophisticated cyber attack. Others have been known to have been prosecuted for similar “juvenile” attacks but she does not appear to have been. Why do you think this is?
The -trial- (edit sorry sentancing) hasn't happened yet, so it's difficult to say. There was some suggestion that in the messages with the person providing the images he asked not to get images of underage. However, this could be a ruse. He still had the images, and there are no suggestion he got rid of the images and he didn't report. P*rn is widely available, so there is no need to revieve it though WhatsApp. There is obviously a reason he is talking with this individual.
Can you explain what you are referring to when you say a suspended sentence should be because of the offence not the offender? The reasons given sentencing guidelines (both for this offence and the general guidelines) for suspending a sentence are: * Realistic prospect of rehabilitation *Strong personal mitigation * Immediate custody will result in significant harmful impact upon others I can't see anything relating to what you said...
How can child sexual abuse be a non custodial offence? I don’t care even If the perpetrator pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and did not partake in the activities themselves because the children have still be harmed, and if there was nobody looking or downloading such images then maybe less kids would be harmed.
That is one way of looking at it, but there are other possibilities which might complicate matters. There is a difference between images or videos made to order and/or paid for, on the one hand, compared with freely available historical ("vintage") material on the other hand. Your argument applies most convincingly to the former case, where somebody is making money and/or manufacturing material to order. However, the latter case is different in that the abuse is historical and nobody is making any money from the distribution of the material. It might be argued that a p-phile denied access to historical material cannot gain any "relief" except by abusing real victims, making such offending more likely. The counterargument is that exposure to even historical material makes the offender more likely to go out and abuse real victims. I guess it is a difficult thing to test to see which is the reality! I suspect that there might be two kinds of offenders, those who get "relief" from historical material and don't want to hurt anybody, but also those offenders for whom exposure to such material would encourage actual abuse. As always, life is messy and complicated!
@@stephenthorpe3591 agreed but just because the abuse was historical does not mean that a child had not been harmed, indeed looking at historical material may encourage them to experiment on live victims.
@@MikeKey-y7l I don't think that you properly understood my point! Of course a child was abused historically. Yes, looking at historical material might encourage experimentation on live children, in some cases. In other cases, stopping a p-phile from looking at historical material might equally encourage them to experiment on live children, because that is the only way left that they can satisfy their urges. I'm assuming here that regular 18+ porn does, in some cases at least, act as a surrogate for actual sex. I don't really know a lot about this, but it seems possible that some p-philes at least are not comfortable with their predicament and don't want to hurt anybody, so they might try to satisfy their urges in a manner that minimises harm. Taking that option away from them could lead to bad consequences. On the other hand, maybe it doesn't work like that? I would however want to find out before making it impossible for anyone to access historical material of this nature! You might end up increasing the incidence of actual abuse!
Were he to have been personally abusing children, it absolutely would be a custodial sentence with a guideline (for Cat 2A) of 3-7 years. Possession of an image is a very different crime to committing the acts depicted in the image.
There is the option of probation(he see's a probation officer once a fortnight or month), if he breaks his conditions of probation he is in court again for the original charge! Still a slap on the wrist in my opinion, BUT it depends on the conditions imposed by his probation order!
No. Please don’t go down that rabbit hole! The legislature and the executive have to be separate in a civilised country. Unless you prefer a totalitarian state!
That's a big issue in jurisprudence. A lot of people are against SL offences on principle because guilt is totally separated from culpability. The main justification for them is they put an onus on people to exercise due diligence when it comes to public health and safety.
The argument was it was to prevent people possessing real images from running a defence of they didn't realise they weren't real. Although as mentioned they still do prosecute obvious fakes. www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children
@@artmedialaw such an altered image ( from real to AI ) has a basis in criminal activity ( although obviously distasteful ) and also has a victim, whereas the unique AI image is unlikely to be made the same way and therefore is not tainted by criminality. Taking an absurd example to make the point, would such reasoning extend to a watercolour or charcoal line drawing? Surely it’s the job of the prosecution to bring evidence of how the image was made and if it was derived from a real image or else not prosecute? Lastly could an AI be prosecuted for looking for images in order to compile an AI generated image?
That's Bollocks, I got convicted of Taking and Driving(I was innocent, I accepted a lift without knowing the vehicle was stolen), The two guys who did nick the car got 6 months(out in 4months) I got two years borstal(judge said he was doing me a favour) Yet I was in the same prison awaiting allocation when the two guys were released, I ended up doing 12 months longer than them. Moral of my story, Any solicitor is better than the duty solicitor!
I do not want to say too much, but the mere fact Huw thought it OK to even think of looking at category A images, should be enough for a custodial sentence. Community service and a slap on the wrist just does not seem enough. #AlwaysUseful #AlwaysInteresting #AlwaysAccurate - Like - Subscribe - Share - Comment
That's what most perverts get, unless there is Physical harm. Although I worked in a garage, a new bloke started and someone recognised his photo, He was taking a 12 year old girl to the beach and abusing her, he had been doing it for over 12 months so she could have been 10 when he first abused her. He got 2 yrs probation😮, Needless to say he didn't stay in that job for long(his boots got filled with oil and his car wouldn't start for some reason🤣)
If someone puts a blank envelope through a neighbour's letterbox and the neighbour opens the envelope and inside are obscene pictures of minors as that person technically committed an offence under UK law even if he reports the envelope straight away to the police? I am just trying to draw an analogy with a mobile phone situation and someone sending an obscene image to someone else. I think it should come down to mens rea.
@tomcomb6173 Well he chose not to take it to trial. I doubt if you reported it straight away, you would get charged. What you are talking about is a snapshot. It doesn't take into consideration as to why he was talking to this person in the first place other planing and what happened after.
@ianmason. It might be by design. As I have heard of similar laws in some US states. Perhaps it is intended you lodge the defence. In the case of Huw he made no defence, he can afford good legal advice so I don't think his prospects were good. This was only one aspect of his offending.
There is a statutory defence "that the photograph or pseudo-photograph was sent to him without any prior request made by him or on his behalf and that he did not keep it for an unreasonable time". That would apply in your example and the individual would not be guilty of an offence.
Although I'm trying to put off the idea of Winter, I have given thought to this. I'll just have to head out earlier. Or it'll just be "Where am I today? No idea, it's too dark to see."
“He’s suffered enough” or he’s had a long Holliday on full pay in a posh sanctuary ( “seeking treatment”) I know how over full the prisons are and the pressure on the judiciary and CPS not to pout the worst case. Because community service costs so much less than prison ( if there was a free cell)
In one sense he is looking at a lifetime of recognition in any public space in the English speaking world. Maybe I exaggerate. What's the right response when he is seen walking past a childrens playground, standing outside a school or even in the supermarket .... he's got to eat unless his pension also pays for a home help. The children in the images he drooled over have parents and uncles, maybe not in this country, but somewhere. Is the BBC or the taxpayer going to fund his new anonymous identity? Does he get to see his children or his grandchildren or their friends without supervision?
Do they take into consideration how long he was looking at class A photos? You say they take his age into consideration but what about the length of time he was committing his crimes? To protect our children we need a strong deterrent and to me a custodial sentence is just tick boxing and weak. The argument he has suffered enough is laughable when children's lives are wrecked.
The answer to that is yes. It's relatively easy to look it up yourself - the website is one of the top results if you search for "Sentencing guidelines UK". But, to cite from "Aggravating factors" - Period over which images were possessed, distributed or produced - High volume of images possessed, distributed or produced They're non-statutory, but present.
Interesting views as always, watched a couple of random UA-cam videos earlier, that round tower is it knights templar, apparent they are round? As for the guilty and worming your way out of mandatory 1 year jail sentence. clearly the amount of money he as at his disposal meant someone could have told him to plead guilty early and plead all sort of mid things and endless remorse. All the while the judge you mentioned will be banging his head against proverbial brick wall, knowing he will walk. All the while those abused don't get their day in court. Coincidentally, one you tuber said he also watched videos of children being abused. In his guilty plea is he going to give locations of the makers or location of the abused? Guidelines who needs them when you could have a jury. Good job your not in Scotland on the West Highland Way, you would be full of ticks, capable of giving lyme disease. I have lots of walks booklets West highland being one I would have done by now, but not allowed to put back pack on, thoracic outlet syndrome, one aspect coming to light 13 months post non fault RTA. They could make a maze out of that overgrown firn for children to explore.
"Sentencing Guidelines. What are they and how do they work?" You don't know that's for sure. I doubt the judiciary divulge such information for it to be used on youtube, come on !!
Yeah. Normally I do lots of long distance hill walking. But I'd been a bit deskbound and it's amazing how even a few days off hits your cardio. Luckily it comes back quick. Few more long walks and I'll be back able to hold a phone call on a 30' hill.
Excellent content. Great presentational style. Very refreshing.
Is walking round historic sites whilst discussing paedophilia a way to bypass youtube or some shit
Excellent. Both informative and interesting. The location, too, takes me back to my youth, so thanks for that too!
Very interesting. Also enjoyed the walk
Thanks for the explanation and clarification.
He hasn't clarified anything because he's expressing his freedom of speech and that's all he does. That does not mean he knows what he's talking about !
Good morning to you. A delightful walk with you. I enjoyed the information muchly. Clear as usual and the actual written words helped. The nod to the place where the guidelines are was most welcome. Basset sounds like a fair chap, one of only a few I have heard of sadly. Thank you. 😊.
Check yourself for ticks after walking in all that bracket
Check yourself for facetious comments on paedophilia
Appreciate your calm and sober assessment. Part of me wonders had he been a more ordinary person perhaps he'd be jailed? Lovely scenery too, by the way.
Most of the men found guilty of this do not get a prison sentence , unfortunately .
@@andrewgilbertson5356 Sad to hear.
I think the filming of sentamcing has given a lot more insight into how it works and hopefully will lead to improvement.
Good video.. clear presentation and no unnecessary BS all delivered at a faster walking pace than I can manage these days at likely a younger age.
A nice walk in a funky hat is the unnecessary bullshit mate
Very interesting breakdown, Al. I also love your videos and often recognise where you are, having lived in Cornwall over twenty years ago. It’s very beautiful and I miss scrambling breathlessly around Carn Brae.
That was an excellent explanation, thank you for going through it. I think most people would expect more given it’s ‘him’.
Nothing of any substance will happen to him he will be judged by his peers literally.
Yes we will hear lots of waffle about guidelines etc that we all know at the end of the day he will not go to prison
Slap on the wrist!
@@ganndeber1621not going to prison doesn't mean much. He will be punished if he doesn't go to prison
Thank you, as ALWAYS fascinating, informative and lovely to see.
Alex Belfield got a 5 stretch for sending The Patron Saint of Bicyclists, Jeremy Whine, some hurty emails.
@MichelleChalmers-d3s I think it's best to shut your mouth when being ignorant of the facts
@MichelleChalmers-d3s Oh dear. You completely missed the point !
Good Lord! We have an utter simpleton on our hands 🤦♂️
Sam Melia got 2 years for putting stickers on lampposts and he is not allowed to live with his children ever again because the judge said he is a bad influence on them. One of Sam’s children is only a few months old. And since all the children live with their mother, that means Sam cannot move back in with his wife when he gets out of prison.
Thanks for your video. I’m a new subscriber of 2 weeks. I look forward to watching more. 👍🏻
A walk of law
I really enjoyed this video. Although I live in Canada, I find your explanation on sentencing guidelines a fascinating topic in your part of the world. I should add that I have watched and enjoyed so many of your talks and will continue to do so!
I was asked to make a prediction about Mr Edwards a few days ago, and given he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and the lengths his barrister went to try and make out good character, I went with three months suspended for 2 years. Extended probation requirements. 10 years on the sex offenders register.
Crimes against Children should attract a long Prison sentence, 3 months is nothing and suspending it is shameful.
@@forsdykemontague1017 The guy who supplied him the pics got 12 months suspended
That would be my bet too plus some community service. Say 250 hours if I had to put a number on it.
I thought once you were on the register, you were on it permanently.
@@localbod Only if imprisoned for 30 months or more.
Talking continuously on a technical subject whilst walking briskly over undulating terrain must deserve UA-cam recognition of some form! Brilliant!
The "other man" got one year custody suspended for two years for distributing so one would expect Edwards' KC to argue for something less onerous.
I am surprised the possible sentences do not include a substanial fine, reflecting the lucretive commercial aspect given the conspiratorial nature of a crime where indecent images are traded. During lockdown organising a snowball fight attracted a £10,000 fine, which by all reports would be pocket money for Huw Edwards.
Things like the Proceeds of Crime Act allow for the recovery of money that was made by criminal activity. It's not a fine because it's not punishment; it's just saying that the criminal has no legitimate right to the money, so it's being taken away.
@@beeble2003 With respect Huw Edwards salary and his forthcoming very generous pension are not the proceeds of crime. It would be widely agreed that he systematically used his wealth and position to exploit others with less wealth and no voice to object. That seems to include work colleagues as well as exploited children.
He should have known better. As an intelligent adult he knew the circumstances under which these images where produced. He is a father and was a husband yet he has shown no remorse when brought to court holding his head high. A reasonable conclusion is that he is morally bankrupt. Maybe he should be made financially bankrupt too.
@@nickdawson9270 I never suggested that Edwards' salary and pension are the proceeds of crime. You were the one who introduced the idea of a fine as a possible sentence, based on the possibility of making money by trading images, and that's the point I was addressing. Since there is no suggestion that Edwards ever sold images, it seemed clear to me that we were discussing general sentencing policy, not the specifics of this case.
Thank you Al
Thanks for a really clear explanation.
Community Service !?! Is it any wonder that children are at increasing risk every day ?
Disgraceful but did anyone ever think he would go to prison?
@robertstallard7836 Ok build them
@robertstallard7836 Maybe not send people to prison for drug offences if they are not dealing/stealing, treat it as a medical issue and free up loads of spaces.
@robertstallard7836and putting people in prison is generally a bad long term strategy. As far as we know he was sent a handful of illegal images out of hundreds of images sent to him, we have no idea if he asked for them or saw them.
Putting him in prison so he is in contact with others, is likely to increase offending.
Thanks. I had not previously understood the criteria for a suspended sentence. Given that there is no further revealing of evidence through the trial process, I guess the only reliable background will come from the judge's summary at sentencing.
Read the news and very few cases seem to get custodial sentences for this type of offence.
Very few cases are reported in the news, they pick the ones where they don't get sent to prison because they want you outraged.
Protecting him in prison would be expensive and they can't really do any kind of rehabilitation in prison. He might get a tag, he might have to take lie detector tests, the police will go through his phones, computers etc regularly.
It would actually be easier for him in prison.
Thanks for that breakdown - always surprises me just how much 'legal info' you folks can store in your head! Hope he's not treated as some kind of 'celebrity' - and that possibly the photographs can be traced to the victims to give them the support that they'll need. It makes my blood boil.... Always enjoy where you record/film your videos (and the titbits of history you give with it) Loved the part where you got a bit too far down along the bracken - was half expecting you to stop and say "Now, where DID I park the car?" 😆
I really love walking. I do tend to Zen out a bit though. So it's not uncommon for me to suddenly come to and not have the first clue where I am or how I got there. And I do walk down a lot of dead ends, like the sea or a cliff top.
@@artmedialaw Have to admit, it did get a bit worrying when you were going through that bracken - just incase your foot got caught on a piece and you fell over! I'd not get 10yards if I tried walking and filming, I'd be flat on my face. It's really interesting learning some of the history of where you're at, nice one!
“Celebrity” = more money
= monetary access to King’s Counsel
= higher chance of a good legal result
"Hope he's not treated as some kind of 'celebrity'"
Well, I didn't notice any part of the sentencing guidelines that say celebrities get lower sentences...
I love Mr.Robertshaw's tidbits too.
We have had a couple of Sentencing Acts 2020 and 2022 which we don't appear to have had in the past. Does this change the sentencing guidelines by Act of Parliament and undermine the work of the sentencing council?
Thank ypu, very interesting and illuminating.
I can imagine there could be a (media inspired) backlash against such a perceived lenient sentence. Is there provision for a harsher sentence in cases with such a high profile offender? My thinking is that there could be created (nudged) a link between public profile and moral responsibility. Whether or not justified, there is certainly a prevailing attitude that those who have money or are 'connected' get more leniency and to some extent that could be mitigated.
God forgive me, but when I saw the words on your thumbnail I immediately sang them to "What's New Pussycat".
"What's Huw looking at?
Woh-oo-woh-oo-wohwoh"
God forgive me for laughing 😄but that's exactly the type of thing that would pop into my head! Where it comes from .... God knows!
@@mkdy218 Relieved I'm not the only one with a strange brain! 😆
It made me think of "Here's lookin at Huw, kid" although in this case it's more "Huw's lookin' at kids, here"
Will he be put on the sex offenders register as a matter of course or is that part of the sentencing process.
Loved the walk and thanks for another great episode.
If you end up on the register and how long you're on for is linked to what sentence you get. But for these offences even if it's a non custodial he'd have to register.
(There isn't actually a register as such; it's just how we describe certain notification requirements)
When i see u walking i keep thinking that naked gun scene of frank walking and talking to himself and the end he is out of the city and then thinks....where the hell am i lol😅
Oh that is so me. I do that all the time.
Thanks for your efforts in educating us about the law which is very confusing at times. Also is it possible and sometimes done that a judge can impose a sentence outside of the guidelines.
Tell our friend at BBB that the backdrop to your videos are a lot better and more interesting than the inside of his man cave ha ha.
Thanks John
Is there nothing that would take into account Mr Edwards' (now former) position in society as an aggravating feature? For example I would expect a serving policeman to get a tougher sentence for the same crime than as regular person due to them holding a position where they should be setting an example
It's usually the opposite!
@@iamrocketray That wouldn't surprise
Whats Huw looking at? Illegal images
Always doubt the remorse bit. Is it real remorse or just feel bad because they got caught. For most crimes you wouldn't do it in the first place if you actually felt remorse.
Huw screwed Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Grub'. Wonder if he rogered the cabin boy as well
Where are you? That looks a great place for a wander.
My understanding of the USA Federal giidelines (from having read a number of appellate court decisions on.challenges to sentences) is the US system is somewhat similar: the guidelines are advisory only; jufges still retain discretion to depart upwards and downwards. The starting points are computation of the "criminal history" (first conviction starts at lowest, repeat aggravating felonies are higher). Each offense has a base offense level in points. Then the guidelines have enhancments (add points) for a number of acts or in the case here the number of images add points, and mitigating factors)reduce points (such as for acceptance of responsibilty (plead guilty and additional minus for exceptional acceptance like made restitution before sentencing or conviction). The guidelines range is read off a chart by reading up the criminal history column and horizontally across based upon the points. This is usually a range in months & type of custody (probation or prison). The judge can depart upwards beyond the range (but not above a statutory maximum) or downeards (not sure if can depart below a statutory minimum as in felon in possession of a firearm - very common 60 months min consecutive to everything else).
The types of conduct you discussed here - possession, production and distribution - might be chargable as separate offenses and having done all three would result in a separate sentences which the judge might be able to run consecutively or might be concurrent.
And such an offender of the conduct described herein would be subject to a period of post'release supervised release. It could be 10 years with restrictions on smart drvice & internet use. As I understand supervised release a warrant is not tequired to search the releasee 's residence, car, computer, etc. on a theory that the convict is STILL in custody = essensially in prison.. And being registered under the SORNA (s*xll offenders registry & notice act) is for life.
Nice Carn Brea shot!
Love it up there. I keep hoping to find an arrowhead. But so far the only sharp bit of flint I've found was the one that took out my tyre on the way up there.
(Note the rather conspicuous spare wheel on my truck)
Community service? Yeah, he could be a lollipop man.
You need to do a series on the sentencing guidelines breaking down each category. These guidelines need urgent revision. For instance treating 17 year old murderers as 'children'. My son was murdered by a 17 year old. He suffered a hard death - tortured and stabbed at least 128 times and finally suffocated on soil. There is a huge difference in maturity between a 11 year old and 17 year old yet they are treated the same. And this stupid guideline was the catalyst for the riots organised by the professional thugs. Only recently a judge used this guideline to protect the identities of two little darlings who viciously murdered a man. If they had been identified it would have affected their futures. Wot a shame! And no thought for the victim's family. After all the system is all in favour of the offender.
Then you can start on the mental health card so beloved by forensic psychiatrists and the 'process' that is held behind closed doors.
But I doubt you will.
Sorry this happened to you. That is awful. Most of the time, it is personality traits that lead to the offence and re-offending This doesn't mean they don't understand what they are doing. Legal insanity should be quite rare because they would have to either not be aware of what they were doing and/or they don't understand the consequences of their actions (it is nothing to do with thier moral jusification or lack of). Diminished responsibility is a guilty plea, unlike insanity is where they understand what they are doing and the consequences, but their reasons for doing were clouded by mental strain. This is controversial because there would need to be evidence of this prior and not just during, and they would likely not be able to forsee other options. Example domestic violence victim who was being controlled, coerced and isolated and fear not being able to leave. It is complicated because it can't simply be someone who wanted to get back at their partner/family for the abuse they received although in other cases the mental torment if them doing it to someone else may cloud judgement especially if they fear they will get away with it.
@@paulthomas8262 Thank you for your reply. Re my son's murder. He was the first victim ( they did not know one another- first date met online ) and only victim thankfully given the killer had 4 more potential victims lined up. It was premediated and given a hefty 24 years sentence by the judge. This was overruled by psychiatrists who, under cross examination, had no idea ( despite having the killer under their charge for months before the trial they kept delaying) of any of the facts in essence. Yet within 2 hours of sentencing had the killer transferred back to the medium secure hospital as they had conveniently diagnosed the killer with the usual paranoid schizophenia after the murder. It amazes me that the killer could torture and murder my son then go home to live with the family, start to plan the next murder, display no symptons of PS and continue the same modus operandi that the killer used on my son. Yet the psychiatrists could only reply to counsel that it was down to the PS. Psychiatrists can never be wrong. And just look at the people they release eg Gavin Collins. But they are never held accountable.I have no faith in our justice system. That bed could be used for a person with a genuine mental illness and which costs the taxpayer at least 200k per annum. My son's killer should be in prison.
@sensemaya1 that is hard. I take an interest in this subject. Mental illness alone is not enough to get an insanity verdict IMO. Schizophrenic people can plan, the culpability is not simple, it is not a case of they have it therefore they are criminally insane. Of course psychiatrist make mistakes, and they don't all agree.
@sensemaya1 if you don't mind, can you explain how the psychiatrist overuled the judge? I'm just not sure I understood correctly.
I think what you are saying is he didn't get a hospital order but was diagnosed as a prisoner. I'd that is the case his sentence should remain. He might get transferred to a secure unit but should return to the serve in prison as soon as that is managed. Only appeal should commute the sentence. IMO. Unless there is no minimum term. The opposite of that is where there is no maximum term. Where offenders of minority or medium offences spend years in prison essentially forgotten. This was Jack Straws biggest mistake. It doesn't exist anyone, but there are still people in prison with this.
What used to happen before sentencing guidelines were introduced? How were sentences determined?
now all they have to do is find a community that wants the services of a nonce for 200 hrs. Seriously, how inappropriate is community service for this kind of offense
Good evening to you. My second comment here because I have a concern. I believe a genuine one. And I like clear bboundaries.A scenario first and then two questions.
I set my WhatsApp toggle so that no image sent to me is automatically sent to my Galleries file. Unsolicited someone sends me, via WhatsApp, an illegal image. It will be visible to me immediately I open the message but not before. I have no warning of it's contents.
Q1. Because the image has not been transferred to my devices 'hard drive' am I (legally) in possession of the image? It remains on an App and not on my device.
Q2. As it was unsolicited and out of my control what should I do? Go to the police and explain?
I can envisage this being used as 'revenge' or in a child custody scenario.
Best regards. 😊.
When you said "he was only doing it for research" I immediately thought "Huw are you? Huw Huw Huw Huw"
What's Huw looking at?? Small Children I think.
Be careful of slander. People are watching
@@vimfuego8827 He has admitted it, stop being so pompous
@@vimfuego8827 Slander only applies if an untruth is told. Huw Edwards has pleaded guilty.
Apparently, one of the Conservative leadership candidates, Kemi Badenoch, when asked on live tv what was the naughtiest thing she’d done, she admitted that she’d hacked Harriet Harman’s website. Apparently, Harman’s username and password were “Harriet” and “Harman” so it was a lucky guess as opposed to a sophisticated cyber attack. Others have been known to have been prosecuted for similar “juvenile” attacks but she does not appear to have been. Why do you think this is?
So the cp watcher is now under the watchful eye of the cps.
The -trial- (edit sorry sentancing) hasn't happened yet, so it's difficult to say. There was some suggestion that in the messages with the person providing the images he asked not to get images of underage. However, this could be a ruse. He still had the images, and there are no suggestion he got rid of the images and he didn't report. P*rn is widely available, so there is no need to revieve it though WhatsApp. There is obviously a reason he is talking with this individual.
He pleaded guilty.
@terryboland381ssorry sentencing
Likely very little will be submitted except some mitigation by his lawyers.
Can you explain what you are referring to when you say a suspended sentence should be because of the offence not the offender? The reasons given sentencing guidelines (both for this offence and the general guidelines) for suspending a sentence are:
* Realistic prospect of rehabilitation
*Strong personal mitigation
* Immediate custody will result in significant harmful impact upon others
I can't see anything relating to what you said...
How can child sexual abuse be a non custodial offence? I don’t care even If the perpetrator pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and did not partake in the activities themselves because the children have still be harmed, and if there was nobody looking or downloading such images then maybe less kids would be harmed.
That is one way of looking at it, but there are other possibilities which might complicate matters. There is a difference between images or videos made to order and/or paid for, on the one hand, compared with freely available historical ("vintage") material on the other hand. Your argument applies most convincingly to the former case, where somebody is making money and/or manufacturing material to order. However, the latter case is different in that the abuse is historical and nobody is making any money from the distribution of the material. It might be argued that a p-phile denied access to historical material cannot gain any "relief" except by abusing real victims, making such offending more likely. The counterargument is that exposure to even historical material makes the offender more likely to go out and abuse real victims. I guess it is a difficult thing to test to see which is the reality! I suspect that there might be two kinds of offenders, those who get "relief" from historical material and don't want to hurt anybody, but also those offenders for whom exposure to such material would encourage actual abuse. As always, life is messy and complicated!
@@stephenthorpe3591 agreed but just because the abuse was historical does not mean that a child had not been harmed, indeed looking at historical material may encourage them to experiment on live victims.
@@MikeKey-y7l I don't think that you properly understood my point! Of course a child was abused historically. Yes, looking at historical material might encourage experimentation on live children, in some cases. In other cases, stopping a p-phile from looking at historical material might equally encourage them to experiment on live children, because that is the only way left that they can satisfy their urges. I'm assuming here that regular 18+ porn does, in some cases at least, act as a surrogate for actual sex. I don't really know a lot about this, but it seems possible that some p-philes at least are not comfortable with their predicament and don't want to hurt anybody, so they might try to satisfy their urges in a manner that minimises harm. Taking that option away from them could lead to bad consequences. On the other hand, maybe it doesn't work like that? I would however want to find out before making it impossible for anyone to access historical material of this nature! You might end up increasing the incidence of actual abuse!
@robertstallard7836 Could be a good earner for the authorities, just like speeding tickets!
Were he to have been personally abusing children, it absolutely would be a custodial sentence with a guideline (for Cat 2A) of 3-7 years.
Possession of an image is a very different crime to committing the acts depicted in the image.
Community service, yeah right, Huw isn't going to be out in public cleaning off graffiti is he?
There is the option of probation(he see's a probation officer once a fortnight or month), if he breaks his conditions of probation he is in court again for the original charge! Still a slap on the wrist in my opinion, BUT it depends on the conditions imposed by his probation order!
Who put these guidelines together?
I'd suggest they have a very different moral guide than the people.
I can't believe he won't get incarceration. Although I suppose I shouldn't be surprised he's not one of the public and has friends in high places..
The guy who sent him the pictures, and had more Cat A pictures in his possession received a suspended sentence.
hes gonna get off very lightly
Sentencing body, yet another unelected and unaccountable body.... marvelous.
Yes we electe MPs to create laws and the sentences for them not faceless civil servants and technocrats
No. Please don’t go down that rabbit hole! The legislature and the executive have to be separate in a civilised country. Unless you prefer a totalitarian state!
Created by Parliament, accountable to Parliament.
So if sentencing is supposed to reflect culpability, why are strict liability offences created where no defence is allowed?
That's a big issue in jurisprudence. A lot of people are against SL offences on principle because guilt is totally separated from culpability. The main justification for them is they put an onus on people to exercise due diligence when it comes to public health and safety.
With the AI image, is there a victim? and therefore upon what basis of harm is the charge brought?
No harm, no foul as you pointed out
The argument was it was to prevent people possessing real images from running a defence of they didn't realise they weren't real. Although as mentioned they still do prosecute obvious fakes.
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children
@@artmedialaw such an altered image ( from real to AI ) has a basis in criminal activity ( although obviously distasteful ) and also has a victim, whereas the unique AI image is unlikely to be made the same way and therefore is not tainted by criminality. Taking an absurd example to make the point, would such reasoning extend to a watercolour or charcoal line drawing? Surely it’s the job of the prosecution to bring evidence of how the image was made and if it was derived from a real image or else not prosecute?
Lastly could an AI be prosecuted for looking for images in order to compile an AI generated image?
He can’t get a custodial sentence because the person who sent him the images in thee first place (a worse offence) received a suspended sentence.
That's Bollocks, I got convicted of Taking and Driving(I was innocent, I accepted a lift without knowing the vehicle was stolen), The two guys who did nick the car got 6 months(out in 4months) I got two years borstal(judge said he was doing me a favour) Yet I was in the same prison awaiting allocation when the two guys were released, I ended up doing 12 months longer than them. Moral of my story, Any solicitor is better than the duty solicitor!
Will he have to pay any type of fine on top of the sentence?
I do not want to say too much, but the mere fact Huw thought it OK to even think of looking at category A images, should be enough for a custodial sentence. Community service and a slap on the wrist just does not seem enough.
#AlwaysUseful #AlwaysInteresting #AlwaysAccurate
- Like
- Subscribe
- Share
- Comment
From what I have heard from a little birdy, Lots of judges like little kids😮 and I mean sexually like.🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢😮😮
Community Service? 😱
That's what most perverts get, unless there is Physical harm. Although I worked in a garage, a new bloke started and someone recognised his photo, He was taking a 12 year old girl to the beach and abusing her, he had been doing it for over 12 months so she could have been 10 when he first abused her. He got 2 yrs probation😮, Needless to say he didn't stay in that job for long(his boots got filled with oil and his car wouldn't start for some reason🤣)
If someone puts a blank envelope through a neighbour's letterbox and the neighbour opens the envelope and inside are obscene pictures of minors as that person technically committed an offence under UK law even if he reports the envelope straight away to the police? I am just trying to draw an analogy with a mobile phone situation and someone sending an obscene image to someone else. I think it should come down to mens rea.
@tomcomb6173 Well he chose not to take it to trial. I doubt if you reported it straight away, you would get charged. What you are talking about is a snapshot. It doesn't take into consideration as to why he was talking to this person in the first place other planing and what happened after.
The whole dialogue potentially is a ruse.
@ianmason. It might be by design. As I have heard of similar laws in some US states. Perhaps it is intended you lodge the defence. In the case of Huw he made no defence, he can afford good legal advice so I don't think his prospects were good. This was only one aspect of his offending.
There is a statutory defence "that the photograph or pseudo-photograph was sent to him without any prior request made by him or on his behalf and that he did not keep it for an unreasonable time". That would apply in your example and the individual would not be guilty of an offence.
Up Carn Brea
I appreciate the learned narrative, but why yomp around the country in a breathless state? Bizzare...
They are or appear to be very arbitary.
I have but one question: Al, will you still be doing these vids in the middle of winter? 🤔😊
Although I'm trying to put off the idea of Winter, I have given thought to this. I'll just have to head out earlier. Or it'll just be "Where am I today? No idea, it's too dark to see."
@@artmedialaw I think the winter vids should be from an armchair by the side of a roaring fire. A bit like Cyril Fletcher did in his red armchair :)
I do know some nice winter pubs.
“He’s suffered enough” or he’s had a long Holliday on full pay in a posh sanctuary ( “seeking treatment”)
I know how over full the prisons are and the pressure on the judiciary and CPS not to pout the worst case. Because community service costs so much less than prison ( if there was a free cell)
In one sense he is looking at a lifetime of recognition in any public space in the English speaking world. Maybe I exaggerate. What's the right response when he is seen walking past a childrens playground, standing outside a school or even in the supermarket .... he's got to eat unless his pension also pays for a home help.
The children in the images he drooled over have parents and uncles, maybe not in this country, but somewhere.
Is the BBC or the taxpayer going to fund his new anonymous identity?
Does he get to see his children or his grandchildren or their friends without supervision?
No he will be forgotten in a few months
Do they take into consideration how long he was looking at class A photos? You say they take his age into consideration but what about the length of time he was committing his crimes? To protect our children we need a strong deterrent and to me a custodial sentence is just tick boxing and weak. The argument he has suffered enough is laughable when children's lives are wrecked.
The answer to that is yes.
It's relatively easy to look it up yourself - the website is one of the top results if you search for "Sentencing guidelines UK".
But, to cite from "Aggravating factors"
- Period over which images were possessed, distributed or produced
- High volume of images possessed, distributed or produced
They're non-statutory, but present.
Receiving images being called ‘making’ concerns me.
After they have received the image, there is now two images, the original image and the copy, so they have made an extra image! Simples
In America a school bully of mine got 60 days in jail for very similar crimes. How can you not send people like this to jail for at least some time.
Huw?😊
Knowing the woke judges he'll get 200 hours in community service at a play centre. I've cancelled my licence this week btw.
" 200 hours in community service at a play centre"
You just made my day - thank you.
Interesting views as always, watched a couple of random UA-cam videos earlier, that round tower is it knights templar, apparent they are round?
As for the guilty and worming your way out of mandatory 1 year jail sentence.
clearly the amount of money he as at his disposal meant someone could have told him to plead guilty early and plead all sort of mid things and endless remorse.
All the while the judge you mentioned will be banging his head against proverbial brick wall, knowing he will walk.
All the while those abused don't get their day in court.
Coincidentally, one you tuber said he also watched videos of children being abused.
In his guilty plea is he going to give locations of the makers or location of the abused?
Guidelines who needs them when you could have a jury.
Good job your not in Scotland on the West Highland Way, you would be full of ticks, capable of giving lyme disease.
I have lots of walks booklets West highland being one I would have done by now, but not allowed to put back pack on, thoracic outlet syndrome, one aspect coming to light 13 months post non fault RTA.
They could make a maze out of that overgrown firn for children to explore.
What's Huw looking at? Illegal images of child abuse ya muppet. That's why he's in court!
"Sentencing Guidelines. What are they and how do they work?" You don't know that's for sure. I doubt the judiciary divulge such information for it to be used on youtube, come on !!
Reading your post and your replies to others I think you know my thoughts too.
Wants to be Mike the Cool Person. Settles for being Vim Fuego. Is actually Rik.
You may doubt it but the sentencing guidelines are published online.
@@terryboland3816 It's Adrian Edmondson actually, but I like it.
you need to hit the gym mate
Yeah. Normally I do lots of long distance hill walking. But I'd been a bit deskbound and it's amazing how even a few days off hits your cardio. Luckily it comes back quick. Few more long walks and I'll be back able to hold a phone call on a 30' hill.