Huw Edwards would have been fired by the BBC if he was charged with making indecent photographs of kids whereas employed by the broadcaster.
The 62-year-old newsreader pleaded responsible to a few counts of constructing indecent photographs of kids throughout an look at Westminster Magistrates Courtroom in London, and the BBC has now confirmed that it might have acted “instantly to dismiss him” if Edwards was charged over his “abhorrent behaviour”.
A BBC spokesperson mentioned: “The BBC is shocked to listen to the main points which have emerged in courtroom in the present day. There may be no place for such abhorrent behaviour and our ideas are with all these affected.
“The police have confirmed that the fees usually are not linked to the unique criticism raised with the BBC in the summertime of 2023, however within the pursuits of transparency we predict it vital to set out some factors about occasions of the final yr.”
The BBC confirmed that it was conscious of Edwards’ arrest in November 2023. Nevertheless, the broadcaster famous that Edwards – who admitted to committing the three offences between December 2020 and August 2021 – “was now not an worker of the BBC” by the point he was charged.
The spokesperson defined: “In November 2023, while Mr Edwards was suspended, the BBC as his employer on the time was made conscious in confidence that he had been arrested on suspicion of great offences and launched on bail while the police continued their investigation.
“On the time, no costs had been introduced towards Mr Edwards and the BBC had additionally been made conscious of great threat to his well being.
“At present we’ve learnt of the conclusion of the police course of within the particulars as introduced to the courtroom. If at any level through the interval Mr Edwards was employed by the BBC he had been charged, the BBC had decided it might act instantly to dismiss him.
“In the long run, on the level of cost he was now not an worker of the BBC.
“Throughout this era, within the traditional manner, the BBC has saved its company administration of those points separate from its impartial editorial capabilities.
“We wish to reiterate our shock at Mr Edwards’ actions and our ideas stay with all these affected.”