BBC Presenter Scandal #3

[MickJagersFairyGodmother]

Why is he liking tweets? Whatever the outcome of what happened with who and when, presumably the solids here are he has been paying for something from someone that isn’t his wife, and he’s made a utter fool of himself / treated his wife and kids appallingly. He’s hardly in any position to be taking the high road and liking tweets imo. At best he’s a dirty old git. If he wanted a different life he should have made arrangements to have one.
He also should have chosen a cheaper lawyer. Now it just looks like he’s paying once again for the outcome he wants. Round two. It’s pretty grim these filthy old codgers keep getting to select representatives for the potential victims. What bang average 20yo gets a top top lawyer at the drop of a hat.

 

[ella1979]

I sense a pay off situation imo

 

[VielleFemme]

We have absolutely no idea what relations were between the older man and the younger person. As to "very young": this is simply not true is it. The over-egging of this particular pudding is not helping us piece together a clearer picture of the reality. Too many assumptions based on some misplaced morality about an older man buying content from someone younger. People are projecting far too much on all this in absence of more information.

I think 17 is "very young", don't you? And I'm 20 years younger than HE.

 

[Joannabloggs]

I find it so odd that people think The Sun would publish such a story without evidence, even if they refuse to publish.

This is the same scummy newspaper who phone hacked milly dowler familys phone whilst she was still missing in order to get exclusive. I don't doubt the lengths they would go to for a story

Additional Murdoch has just had to spend hundreds of millions in America due to settling a defamtion case. I don't think anyone within his businesses would risk such another big lawsuit

 

[Seeing_the_light]

Always makes me wonder what our attention was being purposefully diverted away from.

Its the drama, Mick. I just love it!

 

[pommobear]

On a completely unrelated note, I'm loving some of the ways I've seen "defamation" spelt over the last few days.

 

[LadyWeatherwax]

B) Just because the parent hasn’t gained anything doesn’t mean that their expectation initially wasn’t financial gain. Or it could just be that the parent has a fractured relationship with the child and wanted to project the cause of that onto someone else.

I'm going to put my money on this one, tbh. I think Mum doesn't approve of him or her doing online (and/or in person SW), +/- other "lifestyle" things and he or she has gone no contact. Mum has subsequently gone for the nuclear option with not all the facts completely available to her.

Son or daughter has no moral or other qualms about what they're doing, is perfectly happy with their lifestyle and doesn't want to be dragged into all of this.

At least, I do hope that's the case because if not she's given a false affidavit, and since The Sun could still be in trouble here, I don't think that's going to go well for her.

 

[Error404]

& that's the end of that

Unwise but not illegal

 

[Strawberry Tart]

I for one believe the parents. I don’t see any reason they would put themselves through all this especially with someone so high profile which could land them in hot water if they’ve lied.

I totally agree. As a parent myself I’d be devastated if my child was in this position. It may not be illegal if the boy is of age, but the fact a married well known 60 year old tv presenter is paying money into the child’s account would destroy me. I’d do everything I could to stop it, including going to the BBC and Sun if I had to. I would be shocked if the Sun doesn’t have hard evidence, you just don’t print things like this unless you can back it up with proof and photos.

 

[House of Tea]

Paid off or telling truth?

 

[Brian Butterfield]

I feel like I’m in a fugue state.

 

[UsedWeddingDress]

Here's what I think -

Young person sells nudes and has made £35k out of it.
They have also developed a drug habit.
Mum sees this and reports it all to the BBC, which is where the person who was giving the young person all of this money works.
Young person is hooked on drugs and needs money so decides to get a lawyer to say it's all rubbish, in the hopes the money for drugs will continue to flow.

 

[JingleBells21]

Thinking logically here.
17 year old, into drugs, somehow attracts the attention of an older well-known male. Engages in illicit activity, explicit photographs for which the wealthy man is willing to pay. The teen takes the money, either for continued activity or because he is blackmailing the celeb.
Mum finds out. Mum is naturally upset and her child naturally blames the celebrity for the sexual advances and the drug taking. Mum complains to the BBC who don’t do anything with it. Mum goes to the Sun.
In the meantime, the now 20 year old is being advised by a lawyer. He may have already signed an NDA, he may have been advised that taking money could be construed as blackmail. He may just want the whole story to go away so he can get on with his life.

It does sound similar to PSs situation where the young chap also denied the relationship. I think this story is true, it might not go any further and whoever the BBC presenter is will have blown up their life for a bit of titillation.

Perhaps the mum thinks the only way to get her child off drugs is to expose the presenter and therefore cut the funding off.

For the love of god though, just name him so we can move on!

 

[VielleFemme]

I think lawyers may be keen to jump on this pro bono or at discounted rates because it’s a high profile situation

You ever met a lawyer?

 

[suseh97]

If it's not true, why the suspension? The Sun must've made the BBC aware of the evidence they have, and possibly shared it with them. As someone said earlier, why did the young person wait until now to say it's not true? Why let so many people be thrown under the bus over the last 72 hours?
Why would a supposed caring mother very concerned about drug use tell such lies? Why hasn't Huw made a statement as no one elses name is being bandied about anymore? None of it makes any sense!

ETA: Agree with poster who said this could be a distraction. But why ruin the career of a much beloved news anchor? I just don't get it.

It was me that said this was a distraction. I do believe there’s something to this story. I think HE has to be the most realistic candidate. However, I think there’s got to be a reason The Sun ran the story without saying the victim denied it. They could have sat on it for a week or two to investigate the claims but preferred to print a half arsed story. Now nobody will probably find out the truth.
Still think The Sun are disgusting. They had a countdown to Sam Fox’s 16th birthday with photos printed the day of her birthday. Therefore had to be taken when she was 15. Dirty, filthy rag.

 

[Chronically_knackered]

sorry haven't caught up as it's literally impossible to, but as someone who's been SA'd has it not been considered that perhaps the young person involved just doesn't want all this to come out? like, i personally never involved the police as i didn't want to relive everything, and would probably brand my mum telling others my situation as 'rubbish' too if i didn't want it to get out

(sorry if i've got the wrong end of the stick as i've only skimmed through articles)

i thought this too. I’ve heard a number of stories from people who have said that the police/court/media process was more devastating than anything they went through before, and how they wish none of it had ever come out. They wanted the situation to stop, but for the authorities to have never been involved. Their involvement made things worse. Not just SA, but DV, child abuse situations etc.

 

[pommobear]

Why has the Instagram gone then?

Probably because he knew people would be trawling through it trying to pick on things to be suspicious of.

 

[Jwren]

The sun is the most deplorable paper; the mother going to them doesn’t give me “poor mother” vibes. It gives me “make a quick fortune from a paper that won’t fact check anything as long as they sell papers”

 

[ipiraka]

Establishment protecting one of their own heavyweights.. I’m shocked. Wonder how much money they got paid.

 

[Ramsay1985]

yup barmy mother lets keep with the parent blaming. The Woman has gained nothing from going to the BBC & The Sun in fact it looks like she's prob pushed her Son further away

A) It hasn't been reliably confirmed if the child is a son or a daughter. Various news outlets have used both genders.

B) Just because the parent hasn’t gained anything doesn’t mean that their expectation initially wasn’t financial gain. Or it could just be that the parent has a fractured relationship with the child and wanted to project the cause of that onto someone else.

The fact is we KNOW almost nothing.