Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

Limey

VIP Member
Frank Bough - that avuncular figure in the cosy pullovers. Was what he did illegal? That was a shocker and he fell on his sword so to speak.
That was a basic coke and hookers scenario, no? Maybe a dominatrix involved?
Some illegality there, tbh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

RebelUtd

VIP Member
Re. deletion of insta to get rid of messages.
We saw (alleged) evidence yesterday of him sending messages via LinkedIn too. That is still active.

View attachment 2298970

It’s very possible he just didn’t want all the photos of his mum being readily available in case people like me do dodgy screenshots while looking at his watch
Exactly that and I don’t blame him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

euphoria99

Chatty Member
again sorry if this has been mentioned but i haven’t been able to catch up! sat with my friend atm and she’s said HE has deleted BBC off his twitter bio? dunno if anyone can confirm?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

InkHeart

VIP Member
Regarding the photo, does anyone know if it's possible to definitively say if something is AI or photoshopped? I know we can say "that brickwork looks wonky, his face looks weird there" but is there an expert out there who can say to a court "This image is certainly fake"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

steel2001

Member
I have friends who do webcam work and have regulars who tip them a lot of money. My thoughts are that HE is a sugar daddy for this young person and the young person has been spending the money on drugs. The mum has found out HE is the one providing the money for the drugs and is so stressed out with her child being a drug addict that she's gone to the papers to try and cut off the funds for the drugs, that's why she doesn't want paying. He might not have known their age, he may very well have. The young person is probably denying it because they don't want to lose their payouts.
Well it’s too late for that. HE won’t be doing that again…if it is him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1

rocket1234

Well-known member
The point is that Johnny Depp v The Sun was not about whether he was an abuser or not, it was whether The Sun had a reasonable expectation that he was based on the information they had at the time they printed the article. The US trial was a different issue as that was about whether he had abused Amber Heard and it was clear to any reasonable person that followed the trial that Amber was the abuser.
Gotcha 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1

rocket1234

Well-known member
The whole Johnny Depp trial was not about whether he was a wife abuser but whether The Sun had a reasonable expectation that Johnny Depp was an abuser based on the information they had. They won, this is no different. If the Mother came to them with (potentially fabricated) evidence then they can print the story.
They won but was later discredited in the American case that I followed. Sorry I didn’t follow the sun trial as they lie anyways regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1