BBC Presenter Scandal #3

[pixxyy]

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.

First storys from BBC/The Sun both who had contact with the Mum said Male/Son. Because as far as the public are concerned the main suspect is straight so they changed the language to not 'out' him

 

[duggee_hug]

Just realised I also need:

Fiona Bruce: Vicky McClure
Jeremy Vine: Matthew Macfadyean

Liz Kershaw: Joanne Froggatt

 

[rosebetweentwothorns]

Coming this autumn on ITV1 - 'Exposed', a three part drama

Cast:

Concerned mum: Sheridan Smith
Concerned mum's bezzie: Suranne Jones
Concerned dad: George Costigan
Crackhead child: Sheridan Smith in heavy makeup
Huw's a: Joey Tribbiani

and introducing Dan Wooton as Dan Wooton.

Don't forget Maxine Peake as Liz Kershaw!

 

[vp79]

The only article I could find was this

BBC presenter Graham Norton suspended for allegedly paying teenager for explicit photos

The well-known BBC presenter, Graham Norton, has been embroiled in a scandal involving allegations of paying a teenager a significant sum of money in exchange

jobsbots.com

But never heard of this site and it might not be true. Can’t trust everything you read, as we can all see after what’s gone on today!

Take this article with a pinch of salt though!!!

Oh good god, listen I'm just saying it now, I don't want to be seeing ANY photos of GN's bare ass.....its been a traumatic enough week already

 

[1982]

So I’ve not had chance to catch ip on the last 20 pages since this breaking news but something that has made me think
1. If the story is complete BS then surely the presenter will suing the ass off the mother for defamation of character. If he does then I will believe his innocence. However if he doesn’t…
2. The Sun are surely not so stupid to run a story without solid proof. Especially since last mistakes???

 

[Por Que?]

 

[dressinggownofdoom]

i imagine something like this happens-
the young person was getting money for his contact with the presenter, without a scooby doo who he was. The mother comes along - and recognizes him sitting on his sofa in his pants and tells her child who it is. Her child then realizes that they can get a lot more money out of this situation this then means they can afford more crack and their addiction spirals- the mother now doesn’t know what to do- she tells the presenter to stop but he can’t because he’s being blackmailed by her child who would probably have a wealth of messages etc that the presenter doesn’t want made public.
She knows this is what is happening, and is angry at the presenter for putting his career before her child’s drug habit, she chooses to go to their employer first, this does nothing so she goes to the papers as she can’t go to the police because her child is blackmailing the presenter.

or; mum and young person, both drug users, come to rely on the money from presenter. Mum wants more money, presenter says no. Young person wants nothing to do with mums plan. Mum says she’ll go to presenters employer. That doesn’t work so mum goes to the sun.
Could be any number of scenarios I suppose.

 

[jookey]

The deleted IG makes me wonder if he thought that it would delete evidence of him allegedly messaging other young people

Nah he probably didn’t want photos of his elderly mum saved and made into memes.

 

[Doyouknowwhatimean]

This is FASCINATING because it really is a case of ‘unreliable narrator’
Do I trust the sun? No.
Do I trust the bbc? No
Do I trust the word of a mother who went to the paper and not the police? No
Do I trust the bbc presenter who wiped his insta this afternoon? No
And do I trust the 20 year old, potential drug addict? No.

But we are in an Uber liberal time now where everyone's voices must be treated individually.

Unfortunately not in the same sentence but because of Savilles legacy, and things like allowing Clarkson to bully crew the BBC has got a deep seated reputation to shake off. It's still a boy's club run by stereotypical middle-class white men.

The sun will have some proof of they wouldn't have posted it. The editor of the sun KM said that the print paper has less than a few years of even existing in it's current climate, so they can't afford to make mistakes.

 

[pommobear]

The deleted IG makes me wonder if he thought that it would delete evidence of him allegedly messaging other young people

If that was the case surely he would have done it days ago.

 

[PurvyPanda]

I find this very odd. The police are not investigating anything, and the story is now rubbished by the youngster, and that photo of Huw Edwards is actually just a photorealistic imagining of a middle aged man scowling with his a out?!?

All I will say is this - the BBC and the Met police’s reputation are down the toilet, already. If there is any kind of covering for their corrupt talent, and sweeping under the carpet of any impropriety, they have to be finished as they currently exist. I’ve heard an ex Met police officer say they need to sweep the whole lot out, and start again. I would back this, and likewise for the BBC, and any other public service, including Government. It seems rotten to the core.

 

[Chita]

Just realised I also need:

Fiona Bruce: Vicky McClure
Jeremy Vine: Matthew Macfadyean

I hear Meghan Markle is looking for work.

 

[badwitch]

I’ve got to admit. After everything there’s still two aspects that doesn’t fit.

1. ‘What have you done’.
2. ‘Tell your mum to call off the investigation’.

 

[louisababe]

Huw has liked two tweets on his twitter in the last hour

He has …based on defamatory claims

 

[okdo2022]

Oh good god, listen I'm just saying it now, I don't want to be seeing ANY photos of GN's bare ass.....its been a traumatic enough week already

WHAT THE duck

 

[pommobear]

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

 

[givepeasachance]

Coming this autumn on ITV1 - 'Exposed', a three part drama

Cast:

Concerned mum: Sheridan Smith
Concerned mum's bezzie: Suranne Jones
Concerned dad: George Costigan
Crackhead child: Sheridan Smith in heavy makeup
Huw's a: Joey Tribbiani

and introducing Dan Wooton as Dan Wooton.

Ngl I'd watch this. Glass of wine, bag of roast chicken and thyme Walkers Sensations, scented candles on, cat fed and shut out of the front room so she don't annoy the duck out of me. Right up my alley

 

[Squittel]

This reminds me of that time Leslie Grantham got his gob out over webcam in his BBC dressing room even though it is nothing like that time, it’s just that that whole thing came into my head and I thought everyone else should experience my pain.

 

[Furnessian]

Don't forget Maxine Peake as Liz Kershaw!

Rylan will play himself and do it brilliantly, of course

 

[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.