BBC Presenter Scandal #3

[Squittel]

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

The thing is, even if he is never named, his absence will speak 1,000 words.

 

[Jwren]

I think the fact that HE has now removed his IG account speaks volumes, he won’t be on the News tonight and likely never again. He’s only got himself to blame.

 

[Itsalwayssunny]

Presenter and a young person exchange messages.
Presenter pays to see their bumhole.
Young person wants more money.
Presenter gets pissed off.
Young person's mother finds out and goes ballistic.
Press find out.
Tattle goes mental.
Young person realises their meal ticket is out the window.
Young person backtracks and suddenly has money to pay for a lawyer or finds one who is willing to take the case for free (!).
Presenter's career is still screwed.
Young person gets no more money.
There is no good outcome for anyone except gossips.
Fin.

My thoughts were similar
Young person gets into online thing with presenter
Young person decides to bribe presenter
£35k and 3 years later Young persons mother steps in and alerts the scum about the money
Young person realises if this all comes out they will be in trouble for bribery and tries to quell the rumours

 

[pommobear]

‘Are you Welsh’? what a question!!!!!

Also there's a massive distinction between him and Schofield. All the evidence is that Schofield groomed a CHILD. There is 0 evidence HE has done anything of the sort.

 

[TitsMcGee]

The Sun needs to put its money where its mouth is now, or its toast.

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

The youngsters denial clears nothing up and just creates more questions. Why wait several days to announce it's untrue? Why not straight away? Why would your mother make it all up? Why would the Sun publish an article without evidence? Why are the police involved? Why was the presenter suspended by the BBC if there was no strong evidence?

BIB - because the Scum is an absolute shit rag that would publish anything to sell a few copies/get a few clicks on their website.

The police are/were involved and the BBC suspended the presenter because it’s better for both to err on the side of caution, the police have to at least look into something reported to them and it’s better for the BBC to suspend than risk it being true.

If it’s HE and he’s been on onlyfans while he’s married looking at a much younger man, that’s obviously not good (I suspect also not that unusual tbh) but is it really that much different than a person looking at porn mags back in the day or subbing to the various sites out there?

Money is exchanged in all cases and nobody looking at a dirty mag or a porn vid knows whether the people involved are feeding drug habits off it? If they start binning all their presenters for watching porn, I’d be willing to bet there’d be nobody left on TV except maybe David Attenborough and Anne Widdecombe.

It’s also worth bearing in mind not every mum has their child’s best interests at heart. Genuine worried mum or one willing to completely fuck over her child to potentially make a quick buck of her own? Only the people involved know.

 

[Rosie glow]

So now the young person has come forward to say nothing illegal happened everyone on sm who was convinced it was HE and he is a wrong un is going with the he paid them off angle? because they didn't like the outcome
If it was HE and he is innocent I hope he gets justice for having his life/career ruined

 

[SendReceive]

So, nothing inappropriate or unlawful happened. So, something did happen?

The key word for me is “rubbish”. Some element of the allegations is true, otherwise they would be explicitly responding that they were “untrue” or “false”.

The wording is very reminiscent of other cases where defamation is implied, where the allegations are described as “absurd” or “ludicrous”. This then gives the appearance that they are untrue.

 

[Cakeyface]

Maybe the mum is the addict? Wanting a quick payout

 

[PositivelyVonnegutesque]

Let's say a sexual relationship between a 17 year old and a 60 year old is not illegal, it is from a moral standpoint, horrendous. The power imbalance is bad enough but a public figure using money and status to influence that very young, and therefore potentially vulnerable, person. Nope, nope, nope.

 

[anushorribilis]

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”

 

[duggee_hug]

Phrase of 2023:

Unwise but not illegal

I miss the good ole days of Platty Jubes.

 

[Limey]

Pro Bono. Imagine the pay out from the Sun if they published without proper proof or investigation,

The Sun have got a lot of lawyers, would be surprised if they hadn't legalled it to death before printing.
This is carnage.

 

[HEC1993]

Am I the only one thinking of all the other things I could spend 35k on, go on pornhub for free and not risk losing your job and being publicly humiliated?

 

[ImNotJeremyVine]

I think the fact that HE has now removed his IG account speaks volumes, he won’t be on the News tonight and likely never again. He’s only got himself to blame.

Pathetic conclusion. He's probably deleted it to protect his family.

 

[Okgolightly]

I no longer think poor mother. I think this is pretty sick to go against your child like this, even if it’s 100% true. In fact, especially if it’s true… you e got a child who has drug problems and so potentially MH problems and you pull this shit? I would never ever speak to her ever again. She’d be dead to me. The person is 20 and entitled to make their own decisions, even if the mother doesn’t agree.

The young person has been very badly used, especially by the Sun who ignored their statement on Friday saying it’s not true.

Agreed, I’ve said from the start I feel the mother is in the wrong for going to the Sun. Regardless of semantics, she may have just pushed her child to utterly deny everything. I don’t care about ‘oh she was desperate’ etc. You do not go to the tabloids!! Go to the POLICE.

 

[Limey]

Michael Sheen was born to play Huw!!

Quick, someone photoshop Michael Sheen's head onto the ass pic.

 

[BirkenheadTranny]

This threads wild

 

[Por Que?]

 

[pommobear]

Which means it was absolutely nobodies business besides their own.

Quite. People might not like it, they might find it icky, but if both people involved was over 18 then *nothing* illegal has happened here and it's a disgrace it was ever blown up like this in the first place.