Nicho Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 I don’t understand why it’s the BBCs responsibility to investigate it? I understand that there are internal and external optics for them to keep but if the presenter had got images from someone underage it would be with the police surely? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post markavfc40 Posted July 10, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted July 10, 2023 The whole story never added up from the start did it. If you believe a crime has been committed against your child you go to the Police not a national rag. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, markavfc40 said: The whole story never added up from the start did it. If you believe a crime has been committed against your child you go to the Police not a national rag. I wouldn’t be surprised if the BBC said the mum was trying to get money out of them to keep quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Genie said: All it meant was that several other presenters were abused and everyone knows who the one in question is. It was a silly stance to take with someone in the public eye. The BBC could have said allegations have been made against x and he is suspended whilst we conduct an investigation. It would have made nobody’s life worse, but several peoples life better. Well yes, they could do that if they wanted to be sued by the certain party. You can't just go naming people. Imagine how you would feel if some crazy allegation was made about you at work and your employer just splashed your name everywhere. There are legal procedures that need to be followed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Genie said: But the point is people know anyway, so it hasn’t protected him. Do they? All I see is a bunch of Twitter shite that has snowballed and now a questionable photograph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, jim said: Do they? All I see is a bunch of Twitter shite that has snowballed and now a questionable photograph. 21st century ducking stool Edited July 10, 2023 by Follyfoot 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 hours ago, tomav84 said: but what were they to look into? some batshit crazy mum complains to the bbc that her crackhead daughter got her drug money off a bbc presenter. I think it might be a son and not a daughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 hours ago, tomav84 said: "and what evidence do you have to back up these accusations madam?" The parents claim that they saw the presenter on a video call in his underpants. The Sun say they have seen evidence to support their story so I'm guessing there could be some image evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: I think it might be a son and not a daughter my bad, thought they had been referred to as she...interesting that they're going with the "them/they/their" pronouns. like they deliberately are avoiding genering them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: The parents claim that they saw the presenter on a video call in his underpants. The Sun say they have seen evidence to support their story so I'm guessing there could be some image evidence. The parents have now stated they DO have screenshot evidence. It does not seem their angle is to prosecute the presenter for doing something illegal - I am not convinced they even knew it was iilegal at 17. It seems they just want the presenter to stop giving money to their child and funding an alleged drug habit. You also have to wonder who paid for the solicitor. The Sun are really doubling-down on this which makes me think they are on the right side of this. Edited July 10, 2023 by Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, tomav84 said: my bad, thought they had been referred to as she...interesting that they're going with the "them/they/their" pronouns. like they deliberately are avoiding genering them I was watching a news channel earlier where someone said "this young man" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 2 minutes ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: The parents claim that they saw the presenter on a video call in his underpants. that's not really evidence is it 2 minutes ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: The Sun say they have seen evidence to support their story so I'm guessing there could be some image evidence. not seen this and i just trawled through the various sun stories about it...you'd think with the latest comments from the person's lawyers that they'd be shouting this from the rooftops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 hours ago, tomav84 said: "and you have that bank statement right?" The parents are claiming they do and that they showed these to the BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 Just now, tomav84 said: that's not really evidence is it not seen this and i just trawled through the various sun stories about it...you'd think with the latest comments from the person's lawyers that they'd be shouting this from the rooftops? Have you read the current main story on the Sun website titled "the BBC are liars"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: The parents are claiming they do and that they showed these to the BBC. fair enough...i've missed all this. all i saw was the parents saying they've SEEN the bank statement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted July 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Deano & Dalian's Umbrella said: Have you read the current main story on the Sun website titled "the BBC are liars"? https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/23011826/family-bbc-star-testimony-ignored/ Quote Emails seen by The Sun show the stepfather told the Beeb on May 19 of bank statements detailing huge payments from the star. the sun haven't themselves seen the bank statements, just emails talking about the statements. it's very careful wording - no bank statements have been shown to BBC either, they have just described them to the BBC Quote The stepdad revealed he told Beeb bosses they had screenshots of contact between their child and the star. the sun have not seen any screenshots either nor have the BBC have been shown them - they have just been told the family has them...again, very careful wording as you say, the sun believe they're in the clear here (and pains me to say they probably are), because everything they say, they just point to what the parents have said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 10, 2023 Moderator Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, tomav84 said: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/23011826/family-bbc-star-testimony-ignored/ the sun haven't themselves seen the bank statements, just emails talking about the statements. it's very careful wording - no bank statements have been shown to BBC either, they have just described them to the BBC the sun have not seen any screenshots either nor have the BBC have been shown them - they have just been told the family has them...again, very careful wording as you say, the sun believe they're in the clear here (and pains me to say they probably are), because everything they say, they just point to what the parents have said. They’ve printed a story based on someone said they’ve seen something. That doesn’t get the Scum off the hook at all. They print allegations, it’s down to them to check the facts before they publish. They've clearly admitted they’ve not done that Even if they had the evidence which they clearly don't (despite talk of handing a dossier to the Police/BBC) and it turned out to be incorrect, they’d still be liable Even the Police have said they’ve seen no evidence 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 10, 2023 Moderator Share Posted July 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Nicho said: I don’t understand why it’s the BBCs responsibility to investigate it? I understand that there are internal and external optics for them to keep but if the presenter had got images from someone underage it would be with the police surely? Absolutely this. Even a cabinet minister was claiming that the BBC should be “given space to investigate the allegations.” Why? They have no powers of investigation. It’s a Police matter and so far no-one has shown even the Police any evidence of a crime. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 (edited) ITK version I’ve heard is that unnamed BBC man “met” younger victim on a well known site where people who are supposed to be 18+ sell pictures of themselves. Escalated to direct contact and somehow a lot of money has changed hands - probably blackmail, hence the enormous figures being stated. Assuming any of that is true, it really doesn’t sound like a “grooming” case or even a celebrity exploiting his status. And seems pretty unfair to expect him to have known the age of the supposed victim (although no idea where the law stands on this). Taking all of that into account, it’s hard to see what the public interest case is, nor really what the star has done wrong morally or legally besides an interest in gay porn. That’s probably why the parents and The Sun have gone for the funding a crack addiction angle, but again unclear how he’d have known about that. There doesn’t seem to be any suggestion they actually met in person or had a relationship? Sextortion more likely than anything else, which would make the BBC star the victim. The Sun are doubling down on their decision to publish a very vague story, but they’ve dodged so many details that you wonder how confident they really are. Edited July 10, 2023 by KentVillan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano & Dalian's Umbrella Posted July 10, 2023 Share Posted July 10, 2023 31 minutes ago, bickster said: Even if they had the evidence which they clearly don't The Sun have said: "We have seen evidence that supports their concerns" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts