Huw Edwards’ ‘long-earned reputation in tatters’, judge says

The 63-year-old was handed a six-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, during a hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Monday.

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.

The chief magistrate said the medical evidence appears to confirm that Edwards had no memory of viewing any particular image because of his mental health at the time, and accepted that the former broadcaster did not store or send the images or gain any gratification from them.

The court was taken through details of Edwards’s mental health history, with reference made to one report by a consultant psychiatrist and neuropsychiatrist that recorded Edwards took two months of sick leave “following an anonymous denunciation” in 2018.

The same psychiatrist concluded Edwards was at “considerable risk of harm from others” and the risk of taking his own life was “high and significant” if he was imprisoned.

Another medical report, by a forensic psychosexual therapist, said: “The feelings of being desirable and unseen alongside Mr Edwards’ unresolved sexual orientation created a perfect storm where he engaged in sexual infidelities and became vulnerable to people blackmailing him.”

The judge said he believed the former broadcaster’s remorse was genuine and that his mental health at the time of the offences could have impaired his decision-making.

On Edwards’ risk of reoffending, the judge said: “I am of the clear view that you do not present a risk or danger to the public at large, specifically to children.

“There is a realistic prospect of rehabilitation.”

He declined to make a sexual harm prevention order against Edwards.