The BBC is interviewing someone (used to be an editor for the Sun if I heard and remember right) and he thinks the presenter will never be named:
A) there are two views of what is happening by the two different sides
B) the bad wolf may not be as bad
not entirely sure what the point he’s making is but interesting to think they may never be named
May suggest that due to how they came into contact that no illegality has taken place OR the illegality is "accidental"ie only fans where folk should all be 18 or over type scenario.
Point A.may be referring to the fact the mother is qoted as saying she saw a picture of the guy in his pants which was from a "video call". Suggests it has been deliberately screen shotted. Add in the mum quoting the overheard phone call "I told you not to f***ing call me again", the multiple payments could be blackmail. The sums involved do seem excessive for viewing video acts etc.
Have to wait for the story to come out fully though.