David Walliams #2

New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Apologies if I have missed the information but other than Jonathan Ross being mates with these people and the comment made in his speech, has he actually done anything else that we know of that has been questionable?

I find it hard to believe that interns, runners, researchers etc on TV shows, on radio etc.. all know about things / heard rumours but Jonathan Ross knew absolutely nothing of their behaviour

Also just how close was he to Walliams and Brand? Was it a work friendship or did it extend further?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
The people whose misconduct has been exposed in the last 3 years

- Schofield
- Huw Edwards
- Gregg Wallace
- Gino D’Campo
- Russell Brand
- Walliams
- Graziano Di Prima
- Giovanni Pernice
- Scott Mills
- Jermaine Jenas

All within 3 years. Perhaps adding Jermaine into that last is a tad unfair- as far as I know, and for want of a better term, “all” he did was sext other women behind his wife’s back, and he did at least have the decency to reflect and apologise rather than go on about how he’d been victimised, but still… a lot of misconduct
You can add to that Coronation St & Dr Who character actor Eric Potts. Hes being sentanced tomorrow for child porn photos.

Noel Clarke starts trial at Southwark very soon.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 5
The people whose misconduct has been exposed in the last 3 years

- Schofield
- Huw Edwards
- Gregg Wallace
- Gino D’Campo
- Russell Brand
- Walliams
- Graziano Di Prima
- Giovanni Pernice
- Scott Mills
- Jermaine Jenas

All within 3 years. Perhaps adding Jermaine into that last is a tad unfair- as far as I know, and for want of a better term, “all” he did was sext other women behind his wife’s back, and he did at least have the decency to reflect and apologise rather than go on about how he’d been victimised, but still… a lot of misconduct
Jenas did more than sext women behind his wife's back. He was sending unsolicited fool pics to women.
 
  • Sick
  • Wow
Reactions: 6
I don’t want it to sound like I’m crusading for the BBC but the “BBC is full of n*nces” stuff in this context is incredibly frustrating to me in how it inadvertently negates how widespread an industry problem the protection of predatory men is by shoving the responsibility onto one organisation. BGT was Walliams’s biggest gig for years and that was ITV, same with Harper Collins publishing his books for so long. Focusing on the BBC (imo) loses sight that predators exist in every large company in every industry but particularly across the entertainment industry where there’s little safeguards due to the nature of moving job to job. It’s a culture perpetuated across companies and I think making it all about the BBC in this instance is dismissive of how that culture is able to survive
While I take your point that it’s rampant across the entertainment industry, the BBC positions itself as the nation‘s trusted broadcaster. We pay for it whether we want to or not.

And while I think the trust from the general public is waning, it’s embedded in many of the older generation who think anyone employed by the BBC is an all round good egg. It provides a veil of legitimacy that doesn’t apply to broadcasters.

And it’s not as rife in other industries because ‘the talent’ isn’t deified to the same extent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
Apologies if I have missed the information but other than Jonathan Ross being mates with these people and the comment made in his speech, has he actually done anything else that we know of that has been questionable?

I find it hard to believe that interns, runners, researchers etc on TV shows, on radio etc.. all know about things / heard rumours but Jonathan Ross knew absolutely nothing of their behaviour

Also just how close was he to Walliams and Brand? Was it a work friendship or did it extend further?
Yeah I think that Ross is an enabler rather than a creep himself. Of course I’m prepared to be proven wrong about that
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7
She was 18, he was 32. According to the Guardian it was November 2003.

You can tell how young she is by how weird her outfit looks next to everyone else. She looks like a kid who’s blown her wages from her Saturday job in Topshop. That’s not a criticism of her btw, just a sign of how young and naive she must have been.
Yeah, and she also looks miserable compared to the others around the table. Iirc this is the woman who said she had nowhere to live, Walliams suggested she stay at his place, then every night he'd try to persuade her to sleep with him. She said that after a couple of weeks he became very cold towards her and she left. I think this story is so revealing, not just because it describes him preying on someone clearly young and vulnerable, but also because it shows him to be very callous when that person can't be manipulated into having sex.

Those leaked BGT comments are also pretty cruel and show how much disdain/vitriol he must have for women. And yet he claims to be a gentleman who just likes the company of beautiful women - yeah, right!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12
He delivered it though so he must have thought there was something in it. You wouldn’t call out a random name for dating underage girls surely?
he also said that it was shown to him prior to be show and he was happy with it - he may not have written it, but it's not like it was sprung on him, he had the opportunity to refuse to include it if he thought it. was inappropriate. he said he thought the joke was a reference to Walliams' preference for dating women younger than him - younger but of legal age not actual CHILDREN, yet the reference was specifially to 15 year olds, so that's a tit excuse tbh. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10
View attachment 4178267

Best I can do. There are many more silhouettes for these injunctions but these are the 2 most recent that I could find that the media are using.

One on right is PPT aka David Walliams.
guaranteed they aren't silhouettes of the individuals though - a resemblance perhaps, but it's the media, they WANT to cause speculation in the same way they use sensationalist headlines. to me, the second silhoutte is giving Jimmy Carr - and I very much doubt it's him. I feel like Kathrine Ryan has a good radar in terms of recognising which men are creeps, and Jimmy is one of her best friends. can't imagine she would know him THAT well and still not pick up on it if he was a predator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7
It did cross my mind that perhaps these people didn't know. People have had whole other relationships, kids and lives on the side and their partner had no idea 🤷‍♀️
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2
I don’t want it to sound like I’m crusading for the BBC but the “BBC is full of n*nces” stuff in this context is incredibly frustrating to me in how it inadvertently negates how widespread an industry problem the protection of predatory men is by shoving the responsibility onto one organisation. BGT was Walliams’s biggest gig for years and that was ITV, same with Harper Collins publishing his books for so long. Focusing on the BBC (imo) loses sight that predators exist in every large company in every industry but particularly across the entertainment industry where there’s little safeguards due to the nature of moving job to job. It’s a culture perpetuated across companies and I think making it all about the BBC in this instance is dismissive of how that culture is able to survive
The BBC, a state owned broadcaster which we are forced to pay for, spent decades enabling and covering up for one of the worst individual pedalos in recorded world history*.

Can you imagine if GB News did that? Sky? The Sun? A premier league football club? They'd be shut down pronto and the enablers arrested.

Not having a go at you @duskwithoutdawn but honestly anyone who thinks the BBC still deserves to exist after enabling one of the worst individual pedalos in recorded world history* can absolutely get the fuk out of here, I mean come on, put it in it's correct perspective, it's horrifying, get the fuk outta here, gimme a break.

*Credible estimates put his total number of victims in the thousands. In addition, Savile was a necrophile. Furthermore, in the 1990s a whistleblower from what is now West Yorkshire Constabulary reported that in the 1980s police had wanted to investigate Savile for his links to the Yorkshire Ripper but were dissuaded by bosses from doing so. He was questioned and one senior officer, John Stainthorpe, felt he should be looked at more closely, as he told The Guardian years later.

As everyone knows (or should), Ripper victim Marguerite Walls' body was found in Savile's back garden of his house in Leeds. About 5 of Sutcliffe's victims were killed in Leeds which police felt was strange as it was not his 'home turf'. It was, of course, Savile's, and the scene for many of his early attacks when he was a DJ there. As we also know, Savile was a regular visitor of Sutcliffe's in Broadmoor.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 11
The concept of “knowing “ can be a bit of a mixed bag.
Yes there are those like Walliams and Brand that hide in plain sight, but even then many people will simply think that it’s an ott joke and that no one would be that bold.

Then then the are men that just give people the ick, look at the many names across the Walliams/Brand/Gossip threads, no evidence, just that a sizeable number of people have a “feeling”, we know many people easily would believe they are predators .

The thing is that also means there are many famous men out there that absolutely do not give the ick, they are the total opposite, good looking seemingly nice guys and these are popular men, so the fear of being disbelieved reporting these men is much higher than the icky ones, the backlash and disbelief is also higher.

Imagine being the lesser looking sidekick of one of these popular guys, who will believe you unless you have solid evidence, how do you actually get solid evidence, even the women assaulted struggle to get people to believe them.
What if they are wrong? They tank their lives because they think the guy is a wrong un’, but they have no evidence?
The best they can do is cut ties and warn women to stay away- which seemingly happens, you make a few pointed jokes- again this happens, but as we have seen, it doesn’t change much.

Many of us might even work with a guy that we have a feeling about, heard jokes about , been warned about, but we can’t report them because we don’t have evidence, then the guy gets caught and we say we always knew, of course we then get challenged on why we didn’t speak up!

Sadly many of us will already know a rapist, without knowing he is a rapist.
Perhaps even very closely.
Someone we like or love.
If he gets caught, people may ask how we didn’t know!
Because these sick guys put a lot of time and effort into not getting caught.

Anyway that’s my cheerful thought for the start of the day
I’ve worked with two guys who were- separately- imprisoned for grape. One of them I didn’t know that well but still didn’t think he would be capable. The other I knew quite well out of work. Had no reason to believe he’d ever do anything like it, no behavioural red flags for me or anything, I think even if I saw him now, I think a small part of me would still doubt the verdict😭. I’m not stupid, but I think sometimes in people, there is an element of self protection, whereby you can’t let yourself believe what someone you like/ love has done because the consequences are just too overwhelming to bear. Then follows the penny dropping moment. Of course, I’ve also met men who were ‘handsy’, ‘creepy’ and who I wouldn’t want to spend time alone with. And they’re still out there doing it!
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 2
As everyone knows (or should), Ripper victim Marguerite Walls' body was found in Savile's back garden of his house in Leeds. About 5 of Sutcliffe's victims were killed in Leeds which police felt was strange as it was not his 'home turf'. It was, of course, Savile's, and the scene for many of his early attacks when he was a DJ there. As we also know, Savile was a regular visitor of Sutcliffe's in Broadmoor.
I don't know where you read this but Marguerite Wall's body was found in the garden of a local magistrate - the house was named Claremont and was on New Street. Farsley which is 11kms from Leeds.
Edit - Jimmy S only had a flat in Roundhay Park not a house.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2
The BBC, a state owned broadcaster which we are forced to pay for, spent decades enabling and covering up for one of the worst individual pedalos in recorded world history*.

Can you imagine if GB News did that? Sky? The Sun? A premier league football club? They'd be shut down pronto and the enablers arrested.

Not having a go at you @duskwithoutdawn but honestly anyone who thinks the BBC still deserves to exist after enabling one of the worst individual pedalos in recorded world history* can absolutely get the fuk out of here, I mean come on, put it in it's correct perspective, it's horrifying, get the fuk outta here, gimme a break.

*Credible estimates put his total number of victims in the thousands. In addition, Savile was a necrophile. Furthermore, in the 1990s a whistleblower from what is now West Yorkshire Constabulary reported that in the 1980s police had wanted to investigate Savile for his links to the Yorkshire Ripper but were dissuaded by bosses from doing so. He was questioned and one senior officer, John Stainthorpe, felt he should be looked at more closely, as. he told The Guardian years later.

As everyone knows (or should), Ripper victim Marguerite Walls' body was found in Savile's back garden of his house in Leeds. About 5 of Sutcliffe's victims were killed in Leeds which police felt was strange as it was not his 'home turf'. It was, of course, Savile's, and the scene for many of his early attacks when he was a DJ there. As we also know, Savile was a regular visitor of Sutcliffe's in Broadmoor.
I didn't know any of this regarding the physical proximity of Sutcliffe's victims to Savile. I can't believe that was coincidence. Every time I hear something about these men it brings out more and more horror. :sick:
 
"There is no HR in TV".seriously? Is this true? I’m genuinely shocked , no wonder there’s so many predators attracted
It can depend very much on the individual production companies. An HR department isn't actually a legal requirement for a workplace.

Ironically as much as people want to decry them, a big organisation like the BBC probably will have an HR department BUT a lot of production staff won't be necessarily employed by them directly. Instead they'll be likely contracted with a production company (usually for the length of a specific project or a set period) so that's their employer. Just because a show is broadcast on the BBC/ITV/C4 ≠ being a BBC/ITV/C4 produced show either.

And the TV/entertainment industry can have so many moving parts within one production - subcontractors, freelancers, joint productions - that it's really not like any other workplace.

And that's the point. While there's unions like BECTU or Equity, there's no real oversight for the workplace culture. Ofcom regulates what gets broadcast, but not how it was made.

'Management' at the production company I worked for were effectively Project Managers who also handled the employees, with no HR/management training. Hence my issue where you had one boss was really invested in the mentoring and development aspect of being a manager, while the other one was a very hands off, 'learn by doing' person, meaning the exact same job role was totally different based on who you reported to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7
I don't know where you read this but Marguerite Wall's body was found in the garden of a local magistrate - the house was named Claremont and was on New Street. Farsley which is 11kms from Leeds.
Yeah there's nothing to suggest Saville owned that house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2