BBC Presenter Scandal #3

[suseh97]

So are we saying Fireman Sam is still in the running?

Was it Norman Price in the photos?

 

[steel2001]

That Kelvin MacKenzie has deleted his video of him saying HE name! We will never know for 100% who it is…but his name is now tainted until he makes a statement!

So much going on I can’t keep up!!!!

 

[FenellaTheWitch]

Current age is 20.

So this happened a couple of years ago?

 

[Redgirl81]

You have no way of knowing if the BBC handled this correctly or not. The BBC have have said they started an investigation back in May. If, as the child is saying, there is nothing untoward going on, then the BBC had nothing to address.

We are in a he said/she said scenario here and everyone is choosing to believe what they want to believe based on here say with no solid evidence.

The BBC mustn’t of handled it correctly because he wasn’t suspended pending investigation in May, he carried on doing his presenting and was allowed to go to awards etc.. and also carried on sending money after the reports was made.. so he obv wasn’t investigated properly or he just wasn’t arsed that the mother had put a complaint in.

 

[Don’tStart]

I’ve just been accused of deformation of character on talk tv tiktok live and apparently I’m going to be sued…

Omg what did you say ?! Let me guess, the person leading the lawsuit is Jeremy Vine

As for HE liking those tweets, I’d say that’s a really stupid move. If he’s indeed ‘the presenter’ then he must have full confidence that The Sun aren’t waiting in the wings ready to drop incriminating evidence against him. If he’s not the accused, then he’s inadvertently sided with the accused which won’t work in his favour if it turns out this young man is being paid off or that there’s still damning evidence yet to be made public.

 

[Nadia Vulvokov]

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.

The Sun are disgusting. I studied the Hillsborough case as part of my degree and will never forget how they treated victims and their families. Didn't they also do a Charlotte Church countdown? The hypocrisy is wild.

 

[Ndrangheta]

That Kelvin MacKenzie has deleted his video of him saying HE name! We will never know for 100% who it is…but his name is now tainted until he makes a statement!

Kelvin is the rum of all scummers. Love to see him get made bankrupt through slander.

 

[moldwarp]

Many on here listen out for gossip and other information as a way of getting to know the truth of things. Not to condemn a man who has done nothing wrong and on whom everyone can project their worst fears and imaginings and cosy, bourgeois values.

Ok that’s great but listen, you’re wasting your time trying to convince me. Please continue caping for your wealthy white cis male Presenter. there are many other posts here which you need to be busily rebutting with your strange justifications of toxic power imbalances, exploitation and familial betrayal

 

[givepeasachance]

Just a thought: Theoretically, would deleting one’s Instagram anonymise any DMs that you had sent? Say, sexually explicit messages to young men? So the words would still be in messages but not linked to anyone’s username?

Your profile pic, i mean bleeping hell

 

[Trafalgar]

Just popping in to clarify something ... what age is the young person?

I thought they were 17 now I keep seeing 20.

Allegedly 17 when it started and 20 now

 

[SendReceive]

I'm not saying I'm sure HE hasn't done anything, but I really don't think that taking a social media account down proves anything either way. People, even victims, often take down their socials during a media storm because they're getting thousands of messages, thousands of people are combing through every post they've written in ten years, their devices must be giving them a hundred beeps a minute and they must feel really overwhelmed by it all.

Graham Norton took his Twitter down when all he'd said was that he might not have JK Rowling on his podcast again. Stephen Fry has taken his down several times when he can't stand get nasty comments.

(Please please for the love of God, no one derail this thread into talk about JKR or gender issues. I'm literally just saying people take their socials down for reasons other than being a criminal.)

I get that, but why only Instagram but not Twitter? That doesn’t make sense to me, unless deleting the Instagram account anonymises some spicy DMs that you had exchanged with people… and that was your preferred medium for exchanging said spicy DMs…

 

[WhatABore]

Just a thought: Theoretically, would deleting one’s Instagram anonymise any DMs that you had sent? Say, sexually explicit messages to young men? So the words would still be in messages but not linked to anyone’s username?

That's correct.
It wouldn't show a name or photo anymore.
The name at the top would just be "Instagram User"
With a blank photo

 

[hiesenberg]

Fiona’s off for a cigarette and a large gin.

Same

 

[InkHeart]

I'm alone in the office and I literally can't stop scrolling here!

 

[Geetbo]

 

[Jwren]

It’s not really a case of victim blaming the lad because the lad has come out and said he isn’t a victim. The bigger question now is the parents motive.

Just maybe they were telling the truth and the son wants to brush it under the carpet because he might have been warned by the lawyers he could possibly face legal action if he’s been blackmailing the presenter and he might not have told that part to his parents.

 

[Timz]

True enough, I'm just going on what they said about the word 'rubbish'

That word “rubbish” costed the Victim BBC at least £725phr

 

[BirkenheadTranny]

I've had to order a maccies for the kids tea. Been balls deep in this thread and have left them to starve

 

[Rosie glow]

Maybe the presenter has been told not to put out any kind of statement if they are innocent and are never going to be named aren't they allowed some sort of dignity out of all of this mess

 

[Notworthy]

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.

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.