Huw Edwards has been named as the BBC presenter facing allegations over payments for sexually explicit images
His wife Vicky Flind issued a statement on his behalf, saying he was "suffering mental health issues" and is now receiving in-patient hospital care
The BBC is facing fresh allegations of inappropriate behaviour by Edwards towards more junior staff
Two current BBC workers and one former member of staff said they had been sent messages that made them feel uncomfortable
Earlier, detectives from the Met Police ended their assessment into the original allegations and determined there was no evidence of a criminal offence
The BBC says it is now resuming its investigation "whilst continuing to be mindful of our duty of care to all involved”
On Friday, the Sun first reported that a BBC presenter had paid a young person for explicit photos beginning when they were 17. More allegations followed
We'll shortly be able to bring you new lines from BBC director general Tim Davie on the allegations, as well as an updated statement from the BBC which we can bring you from 12:00 BST.
Standby for those lines, and we'll continue to keep you updated throughout the afternoon.
Former BBC News executive Tim Luckhurst believes it is important the corporation provides some answers, but he expresses sympathy for the director general.
"We all finance a licence fee," he says. "If we have a television at home we are going to pay the BBC licence fee.
"So we do have a real interest in it and that makes life very difficult.
"I feel sorry for Tim Davie as director general facing the enormous pressure that he and his senior executives must be under at the moment over this issue.
"But, let's face it that's the job."
Paul Glynn
Entertainment & arts reporter
A former ITV and Sky News executive, Lis Howell, has suggested that the BBC presenter at the heart of this week's headline-grabbing story should give an interview explaining themselves in order to "lance the boil" of the controversy.
"I think my advice to the presenter would be to actually come out and talk about it, if there is no case to answer then explain the situation," she told the BBC's Nicky Campbell show.
"I think that that would be the best thing to do."
She continued: "It would be tough and difficult but this is going to hang around over this person's head and I think the best route to take would be to come out and talk about it."
Her comments came after one caller, Ranjana in Newcastle, said the presenter in question should be afforded anonymity and be left alone to their own private business until they are "found guilty of anything".
Former tabloid editor Neil Wallis labelled this view as being "sanctimonious", arguing that life "isn't as black and white as that".
Earlier, we reported some remarks from the PM Rishi Sunak over the BBC presenter allegations.
Rishi Sunak told reporters on the plane to the Nato summit in Lithuania: "They were shocking, concerning allegations, of course they were."
Image source, Paul Ellis/PA WireWe've just heard a little bit more from the UK prime minister, who has declined to comment on reports that some MPs could consider naming the accused BBC presenter under the protection of Parliamentary privilege.
"We have an existing set of laws that govern free speech and privacy," he said while on his way to a Nato summit in Lithuania.
He said the government "is confident the BBC is investigating this both rigorously and rapidly".
Parliamentary privilege gives MPs and peers unrestricted free speech in their debating chambers - meaning they can name names without fear of being sued.
Some more now from UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who as we reported a little while ago has called the BBC presenter allegations "shocking and "concerning".
Sunak is on his way to the Nato summit in Lithuania and when asked by reporters on the plane if he had been told who the BBC presenter was he said "no".
However, Sunak said he had been "reassured that the process will be conducted vigorously and swiftly", following Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer's talks with the BBC director-general over the weekend.
Image source, .Former deputy editor of the Sun newspaper, Neil Wallis, says the BBC presenter row has left the corporation "in a very, very precarious position” and says it has "an awful lot to consider".
Speaking to the BBC's Nicky Campbell, he says there needs to be a specific addressing of several issues, including whether pictures existed, if pictures were transferred, if money was paid and how the BBC initially responded when the corporation became aware.
Wallis also warns against the story turning into a debate about the ethics of journalism and accuses the BBC of a "misguided" attempt to do so last night but describes the corporation's reporting of the controversy as "impeccable" beforehand.
However, when asked whether the Sun were "morally bound" to include the young person's denial of the allegations in their story as part of "proper reporting", Wallis agrees and says "maybe it's something the Sun should mention".
Hannah Capella
BBC News
Image source, PA MediaThe prime minister has said that the allegations made in the Sun newspaper about a BBC presenter are "shocking and concerning allegations".
Speaking to journalists while travelling to a Nato summit, Rishi Sunak said that the government has been assured the BBC is investigating and the process being undertaken "is rigorous and will be swift".
"Given the concerning nature of the allegations it's right they’re investigated swiftly and rigorously and it’s important we now let that carry on."
Paul Glynn
Entertainment & arts reporter
Image source, ReutersKelvin Mackenie edited the Sun newspaper from 1981 to 1994
Kelvin Mackenie, former editor of the Sun newspaper, believes the supsended male BBC presenter at the heart of the allegation will never be named. Not now that a lawyer representing the young person involved has offically disputed their mother’s account of events.
Speaking on the BBC's Nicky Campbell show, however, he said the story could continue to pose problems for the star name and his employer down the line.
"I have never believed that the presenter will be identified now," said MacKenzie. "Once that statement was made, it ended the chance of a court action, somebody being charged in relation to this one way or the other.
"The young person has said that nothing inappropriate or unlawful happened. Therefore there is no evidence and there is no witness, so that's the end of that."
He added: "That now leaves the presenter with an issue. The presenter says, 'I haven't done anything wrong and therefore I want my job back'. They won't get their job back but what will be even worse for the corporation and worse for [BBC boss] Tim Davie and his management is the idea that they're going to get a severance.
"And that I see as the biggest problem now looming on this story, that eventually the staff presenter receives licence fee payers' money to go away."
Claims relating to allegations about an unnamed BBC presenter have been dominating the headlines after The Sun reported that the presenter was alleged to have paid someone for explicit photos.
On Monday, that young person's lawyer said nothing inappropriate or unlawful had taken place.
Here, Ros Atkins explains what we do and do not know about how the BBC's handling of the complaint and what might happen next.
Katie Razzall
Culture editor
Image source, PA MediaNo one is really going to be talking about the BBC's annual report later today – many in the media and the wider public are focused on this story.
There are questions around whether the BBC approached the family's original complaint rigorously and in line with its processes as it suggests it did.
The nature of the complaint is key as the family say they told the BBC nearly two months ago.
They say they went to the police who told them there was nothing illegal - so that is complicated and confusing as this was billed as a story about potential criminality.
Other questions for the BBC include: What did the BBC do after the first complaint? When was senior management told? We understand Tim Davie didn't know until last week - but who did?
These are all key questions about the BBC's reputation and its transparency.
Let's bring you a quick recap of the main events in the last 24 hours or so and what we are still expecting to see later today:
Some more now from media lawyer Mark Stephens, who we were hearing from earlier.
He says there's a "legitimate public interest in parents expressing concern about their offspring".
However, he adds it's important to remember in this case the young person is 20 years old and "can make their own choices", saying it's their "decision how to take this forward".
"It's difficult to see where the Sun takes this now," he continues, in light of the young person having their own lawyer and stating "there is no criminality, no wrongdoing".
For the BBC's part, Stephens says he believes there "will be an inquiry" by the corporation's director-general "into how this happened".
Image source, EPAGovernment minister Mel Stride says he will not use Parliamentary privilege to name the BBC presenter at the heart of allegations about payments for sexually explicit images.
Parliamentary privilege gives MPs and peers unrestricted free speech in their debating chambers - meaning they can name names without fear of being sued.
Amid reports some MPs are threatening to use this privilege to name the presenter at the centre of this story, the Work and Pensions Secretary told LBC radio: "I think everybody has to take their own decision on this one.
"I can only tell you what I would do, which is that I would not be naming anybody in the House of Commons.
"Parliamentary privilege is a very special and privileged thing and it should be used very, very sparingly.
"My own view is that, regarding the BBC situation, not enough is known yet by the outside world of absolutely what has been going on here.
Quote MessageAnd until we know all the facts, and we won't know I think until this whole matter is concluded, I think it would be wrong to prejudge things and jump to conclusions that people should be named or otherwise."
Mel Stride, Work and Pensions Secretary
Katie Razzall
Culture editor
The story stands in a series of claims and counter claims
There are these discrepancies and I should point out we don't have access to the full facts.
We have seen little, apart from the letter from the lawyer representing the young person involved to the BBC yesterday evening.
We haven't seen any of the Sun's evidence, any of the bank statements the family say they have and that they have shown the newspaper.
As it stands we haven't been able to verify any of this.
Image source, .Media lawyer Mark Stephens has been speaking to BBC Breakfast and sheds some light on the privacy issues surrounding this case.
"The presenter is entitled to privacy," he says.
In 2018, in an entirely separate dispute, Sir Cliff Richard won a privacy case against the BBC over its coverage of a police raid on his home.
Stephens says that the judge said from that case onwards "if someone was a suspect but there was no investigation, no charge, then they had a reasonable expectation of privacy".
He adds that the "rationale for that is quite sensible" because no-one has all the facts at that early stage.
There are "differing accounts" in the current case and until we know the facts it's "probably unhelpful to conjecture", especially as "life-changing decisions could be made", Stephens says.
Here's an updated timeline of the key events:
One question many people are wondering is how long the BBC's internal investigation may take.
HR advisor Dulcie Swanston says it's impossible to predict a timescale.
"You've got to make sure that it is thorough, that you are being absolutely fair to the employee concerned but equally time is of the essence," she told the BBC.
"So, I really feel for the people who are doing this because they are doing this with an additional pressure.
"Believe me, when I've done investigations like this they are hard enough without the additional pressure of being scrutinised by people who actually don't have the expertise to scrutinise it."
This morning's Sun newspaper is continuing to lead on allegations against a BBC presenter - the family of the young person involved saying they stand by their account.
It comes after a lawyer acting for the young person concerned sent a letter to the BBC yesterday saying claims made by the mother at the heart of the BBC presenter scandal were "rubbish".
Tuesday's Sun now also claims the family went to the police who told them what they believed was happening was not illegal.
Speaking in the tabloid the mum said: "It is sad but we stand by our account and we hope they get the help they need.
"We did this to help - and the presenter has got into their head. How did they afford a lawyer? We are so sad."
The BBC's culture editor Katie Razzall and home and legal correspondent Dominic Casciani explain what we know, and what we still don’t know in this Newscast episode.
They explore the legal difficulties in covering this story, including why the BBC presenter can’t be named.
You can listen to the episode here, as well as wherever you get your podcasts.
