Share.

    27 Comments

    1. undertheskin_ on

      His career is already ruined forever, can’t see him giving a cent back, nothing else to lose.

      Think this is just BBC trying to save some face… “look! We tried, he said no sorry.”

    2. LogTheDogFucksFrogs on

      I doubt they’ll see a penny of this. If they wanted to rake back money from this monster they should have had firm clauses in his employment contract allowing them to do so. If those are in place, then great. If not, as I suspect is the reality, then they’re just wringing their hands. This guy quite transparently wants to fuck kids and has no qualms about viewing child pornography. A guy like that is not going to have the moral integrity to hand back hundreds of thousands of pounds lol.

    3. MrTopHatMan90 on

      What are they expecting? Are they doing it because people said they should? He’s just going to ignore it

    4. Man receives pay according to employment contract.

      Employer decides it wants that back after man resigns.

      Man says no.

      End of story – the BBC have 0 legal right to want to claw back his salary – they are the ones that suspended him with pay.

    5. insomnimax_99 on

      This is kinda pointless isn’t it. He’s not going to do it is he?

      There’s no legal basis for them to claw the money back. He did a job, he got paid for doing that job. When he was suspended, he got paid according to his contract.

      He’s unemployed and completely unemployable, and probably has a messy divorce ahead of him.

      From his perspective, he needs all the money he can get. He’s not going to voluntarily make himself destitute just for the sake of it.

    6. SchoolForSedition on

      This is so daft I am looking close by it to see what we are being distracted from.

    7. terrordactyl1971 on

      He will need that cash to avoid stacking shelves in Tesco when he gets outta jail

    8. SoundandvisonUK on

      Surely they should have suspended a man suspected of this crime – they don’t have a great track record do they? I wonder what’s next – a crocodile expert abusing kids and dogs, could you imagine…… oh wait

    9. the_englishman on

      Yet the board of the BBC also insists that it supported the handling of the case by director general Tim Davie – who confirmed last week that the Beeb had been aware that Edwards had been arrested over the most serious category of indecent images of children. How curious…

    10. The BBC are just covering their arses. They knew he had been arrested, they were happy to continue paying him (guilty or not), he eventually resigned but I imagine it wasn’t fully his choice.

      I think this is very “good intentions” and they need to look at their policies when something like this happens-high profile employee or not.

      This is doing the BBC no favours if it wants to continue getting the licence fee.

    11. entropy_bucket on

      This is going to be controversial but even paedophiles have human emotions and may feel shame. I don’t think it’s a foregone thing that edwards may be feeling bad and could return the money.

    12. Flashy_Fault_3404 on

      Pretending they ever cared about it int he first place 🤣 they’re not getting a penny back and they know it

    13. Whatever he’s done, why would he hand back money he got from his employer? The BBC is just trying a publicity stunt to actually not look like idiots here.

    14. Landofa1000wankers on

      This is a shameful attempt by the BBC to deflect blame by putting the onus on Edwards to ‘do the right thing’. Expecting a man whose career is ruined, and who is probably racking up massive legal bills, to repay money he was paid for work he performed is just preposterous. 

    15. WTF are the BBC playing at? They employed him, he worked, they paid him as agreed in the contract.

    16. Unless there is a specific clause in his employment contract and that clause is not superseded by UK employment law, it would be entirely voluntary on his part with no obligation.

    17. Jimbo_jamboree1234 on

      This just reeks of the BBC trying to save face in the public eye and a move to be seen saying/doing the right thing.

      In reality he was suspended with pay pending an investigation. I wonder is there any instance of other high profile BBC employees being asked to surrender pay accrued while suspended?

    18. Modern-Hannibal on

      What a joke, should we expect anything different from defenders of Jimmy Saville, Prince Andrew and now one of their own Huw Edwards. Join the illustrious elite of BBC’s best.

    19. sortofhappyish on

      meanwhile they’ll be funnelling him MORE than 200k to offset “the payment return”. remember shows made by “third parties” don’t have to declare individual sums. So a tv show just claims say £2million but actually only gets 1.7mil etc. Its designed to be how you pay hush money under the table. Just like they paid hush money for Saville etc.

      Preserve their public reputation whilst ensuring Edwards keeps quiet about their board members, chat show hosts, sports commentators and soap stars involved with paedophilia rings.

    20. Nothing but posturing. BBC knows it has no rights or legal recourses to that salary, but they also know they’ll get absolutely slated if they don’t at least very. No win situation really.

    21. RainOfBurmecia on

      Not going to happen, he has zero obligation to return the money. Companies should start to write wage payback into their morality clause though, way too much nonces leaving jail rich these days.

    22. Mental_Sandwich8515 on

      By the time he pays off his soon to be ex wife, the ex boyfriend he groomed and his legal fees he won’t have much left to give the BBC their £200k. Bloke is pretty much broke at this point. Good luck to the BBC getting much of that back.

    23. No-one volunterily returns money. They only do it because they’re made to. Particularly when his career is over now.