Inside the secret BBC investigation which led to Huw Edwards’s resignation

The announcement last summer caused “panic” in the BBC newsroom and left staff shouting as they tried to make sense of what was happening. “Huw Edwards is the presenter accused of paying a teenager for explicit photos,” Sophie Raworth said, introducing the News at Six. “In the last few minutes he has announced his resignation.”

The false statement, corrected midway through the programme in July, hinted at the chaos that was unfolding behind the cameras at Broadcasting House.

It took nine months and a secretive internal investigation before Edwards resigned. As announced in a terse 55-word statement on Monday, the top anchor — known to some as the face of the BBC — left without a payout after four decades. Now The Times can reveal new details surrounding the investigation and the fallout for Edwards.

Allegations from BBC staff are believed to have “fallen far short of harassment”. Senior sources claimed BBC bosses “did not want him back because of the brand issue” and were desperate to conclude the matter before July’s annual report placed Edwards at the top of the news presenter pay table.

The parents of the teenager at the heart of the sexting payments claim they passed a dossier of evidence, including Edwards’s text messages, to the police. In their view, the investigation was closed before officers had a chance to analyse it.

Divisions in the newsroom have widened between an “anti-Huw” group, which was “resentful” he continued to receive his £439,000 salary while suspended, and a “pro-Huw” faction, which thinks that his career has been destroyed on the basis of flimsy allegations.

But mystery remains about his sudden resignation as sources reported that “his initial instinct was to fight” for his job.

BBC in crisis

The saga broke out in public on July 7 when The Sun reported that an unnamed BBC star had paid a teenager more than £35,000 since they were 17 for sexual images.

The allegations were brought to light by the mother and stepfather of the young person Edwards had been texting, as they were concerned that the cash was fuelling a crack cocaine habit that had “destroyed” their life. Lawyers acting on behalf of the young person later dismissed the allegations as “rubbish”.

The “well-known” presenter was immediately suspended, but the majority of staff did not know their identity. A bizarre process of elimination ensued, with Clive Myrie discounted for remaining on screen, followed by a wave of denials on social media from Jeremy Vine, Gary Lineker and Nicky Campbell.

As Edwards’s name seeped out in media circles, the BBC continued to cover the story prominently, leading its News at Ten three nights in a row, followed by Newsnight allegations that he had sent “inappropriate messages” to junior BBC staff. Five days later two police forces announced they would take no further action.

Minutes after the police announcement, Edwards’s wife, Vicky Flind, a television producer for Robert Peston’s ITV show, released a statement revealing that the unnamed presenter was her husband, and saying that he had suffered “a serious episode” and was in hospital.

The News at Six followed almost immediately. “We got in a real mess, saying that he had resigned when he hadn’t,” a newsroom source recalled. “There was panic in the newsroom, people were shouting. It was all rather embarrassing.”

With the police no longer investigating, the BBC restarted its “fact-finding” investigation, with a tight circle sworn to secrecy to prevent leaks. Its conclusions are unlikely to see the light of day.

Internal investigation

Sources have now claimed that the inappropriate messages Edwards was said to have sent to BBC staff were “unwise” but “fell far short of harassment”, making dismissal unlikely. The findings in relation to the teenager remain unclear.

But Edwards is understood to have resigned without a settlement payout, despite having two years left on his contract, which could have entitled him to about £900,000.

Mystery also reigns over the timing of Edwards’s departure. “They would have completed the investigation months ago, probably before Christmas,” one source said.

Managers began considering who would fill the chair in September, and by November sources were saying there was “no way back” for Edwards. At the start of the year, Edwards remained unfit to take part in the BBC investigation, sources said.

The timing of his resignation could point to pressure to resolve the issue before the BBC’s annual report, expected in July, would have placed him near the top of the pay table, a year after he was suspended.

“They didn’t want him back but it was more of a brand issue,” a source said this week. “The BBC thought it’s time for him to move on but we haven’t quite got the evidence against him. Or he might have just decided he’s too exhausted, or too unwell, to do all that.”

The resignation

Back at BBC HQ, the resignation reopened old fault lines in the newsroom. Some veterans recoiled at the idea that 40 years’ service could be rewarded with a 55-word statement, without a word of thanks.

Some colleagues took it into their own hands to give him a “proper” send-off. Chris Cook, a director of election coverage, said: “A titan of a broadcaster. A privilege to work with. A learned teacher. A friend. Thank you Huw.”

But the view that senior presenters are allowed to get away with too much remains entrenched among others.

One employee said that many believed Edwards was “insane to think he could do what he did” and that the “risky behaviour was ill-advised for a man in the public eye”. “He was hubristic and came a cropper,” they said.

At one work leaving drinks, Edwards is said to have joked to colleagues: “I am the BBC’s number one news presenter — sorry, Fiona [Bruce].” On another he suggested “hardly anybody” tuned into the news when he was not the anchor.

He was “possibly a bit full of himself and thought could do whatever he wanted and no one would know”, the source said.

There is even a divide about his value to the newsroom. One former boss said it was a “blow” as “he was an amazing personality”, particularly for the elections. “You could shout things in his ear and it would all come out OK,” he said. Younger staff said he was good, but “no one is irreplaceable”.

Fallout for Edwards and his family

Edwards is reported to have been living in Wales with his mother 200 miles from the family home in south London where his wife lives, and where their five children, all young adults, remain on the electoral roll.

A family friend said it was “entirely possible” Edwards would leave public life altogether, and that he remained in “a pretty dark place”.

The ordeal is thought to have placed strain on the couple’s marriage, with friends reporting it has been “very hard” for Flind to manage her own career.

Colleagues on Peston, who described Flind as “loyal, fearless and in possession of an incredibly strong moral compass”, have steered clear of the issue.

“No one has been talking to Vicky about it,” one said. “It is all rather difficult and people are nervous about upsetting her.”

What now for the BBC?

Many in the BBC are keen to draw a line under the saga, which they refer to as “desperately sad” for Edwards and his family. But others are concerned that, in its rush to move on, the BBC is leaving behind a number of unanswered questions.

“What are we now to conclude about its policy on staff’s private use of pornography — is it now a sackable offence? And is it wrong to message colleagues on social media?” one senior journalist at another channel asked. “If something very serious happened, then shouldn’t it be made public? And shouldn’t licence fee payers be told how much the BBC has spent on handling the whole affair?”

A former BBC executive agreed. “Can you police this kind of stuff?” they said. “What role does the BBC have as an employer? It would be good to get some sense of how the BBC sees its responsibilities around staff bringing it into disrepute.”

Insiders pointed to staff guidance that everyone who worked for the BBC was expected to adhere to a code of conduct which set out the standards expected.

Tim Davie, the director-general, has previously warned “about the abuse of power from people in powerful positions”.

The Edwards saga has resulted in an apology to the family of the teenager for “shortcomings” in dealing with their complaint and set out a plan to ensure the most serious problems are fast-tracked.

Whatever has happened behind closed doors, few disagree that Edwards’s rapid downfall is a sad end to an illustrious broadcasting career.

Fran Unsworth, a former director of BBC News, said: “It’s such a tragic end. He’s been a consummate broadcaster over the years who delivered a huge amount for the BBC.”