Huw Edwards case left Keir Starmer ‘shocked and appalled’ as he is spared jail
Keir Starmer has said he is “shocked and appalled” after details of Huw Edwards ‘ offences emerged in court.
The disgraced former BBC newsreader was spared jail after admitting three charges of “making” indecent photographs after he was sent 41 illegal images by convicted paedophile Alex Williams over WhatsApp. The 63-year-old was handed a six-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, during a hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Monday.
Asked whether Edwards should have gone to prison and whether suspended sentences were “too leniant”, Mr Starmer said: “I’m really shocked in relation to the Huw Edwards case, really shocked and appalled as I’m sure everybody who has read or looked at it is. As far as the sentence is concerned, I mean, that is for the court to decide, having looked at all the available evidence…
“I have also been busy all day so I haven’t looked at it and I’m not going to get into the business of commenting on court sentences. That is a matter for the court. But was I shocked by what I have seen and heard? You bet I was.”
(
POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
The chief magistrate, district judge Paul Goldspring, said: “Perhaps it does not need saying but you are of previous good character, I accept positive exemplary character, having enjoyed a very successful career in the media. It is obvious that until now you were very highly regarded by the public for your dedication and professionalism, you were perhaps the most recognised news reader/journalist in the UK.
“It is not an exaggeration to say your long-earned reputation is in tatters.” The judge also said that the financial and reputational damage Edwards suffered was “the natural consequence of your behaviour which you brought upon yourself”.
He told the court: “I make clear that the loss of your distinguished career and the financial and reputational damage caused are not, in my view, significant mitigating factors, but rather natural consequences of your behaviour which you brought upon yourself.”
Judge Goldspring said it is “obvious that these are extremely serious offences”, quoting the author of the pre-sentence report who wrote: “The continued distribution of child abuse images perpetuates a cycle of abuse to fulfil the demand for the sexualisation of children.
“Victims may be aware that their images may be or are still circulating on the internet, and this can lead to feelings of on-going traumatisation. The impact of child sexual abuse involving imagery can be severe and lifelong, with the potential for children to be re-victimised each time images are viewed. They may feel guilt, shame, and self-blame, and be vulnerable to further sexual abuse.”
He highlighted the young ages of children involved in two of the Category A images, in which one child is aged around seven to nine, as a “significant aggravating feature”. The judge accepted that Edwards did not make payments in order to pay for images to be sent.
“I agree with the prosecution analysis, this appears to be by way of an apparent ‘thank you’, but not ‘purchasing’ images in a way more often seen in such cases,” he said.
