They were the catalysts, it's us that got involved.
Depher/CPH CIC #5 No Weddings and One Funeral
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Depher Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Remember back in February when one of the council FOIA requests dug up a bunch of reports to trading standards? This is likely old news to many but he spent ages tagging followers and begging them to shower him in praise back in 2019 right before he met them. His usual modus operandi when he's being investigated.
Last edited:
Didn’t Charles Briggs “laugh” react to that #discusting ableist sex joke that Decky shared on Facebook?
Personally, I’d been watching with interest many of the accounts associated with uncovering this fraud - especially the BWC women - for a month or so before joining the Depher threads on here, having been heightened to the MO of online scammers via Monroe and Harris. I’m therefore not party to all of what happened in the past, but I’d like to pass on my sincerest thanks to all of them for putting their heads above the parapet to expose this parasite. It must have been hell for them to be swimming against the tide for so long, but I’m an optimist who believes that the truth will out eventually, and it has. Thank you to all of them, and the BWC girls especially, it looks like they’ve been through some absolute tit. I know that the BBC have published it and it might appear that they have stolen their thunder, so to speak, but I am so grateful that their hard work and tenacity made sure that it got the spotlight it deserved, and let’s face it, the BBC can afford the legal teams to be poring over this and if necessary, fight it in court. A huge well done to everyone concerned, from beginning to end.
Last edited:
BWC are legendary.
The thing is, for the BBC to stand something up it needs to be 100% legally AND narratively watertight. the commissioning editors will want to see one coherent story thread that will legally stand up - a whole load of side plots are confusing, even if they are individually very important. It's incredible that this story has even got out, let's see how it unfolds
BBC News just shared his award stripping on their facebook, overwhemingly negative comments.
At this point he has a small echo chamber left on his own highly controlled Facebook pages and that’s about it.
Yes this is my main inclination atm. It needed to be a tight and focused programme with things the BBC could 100% prove. The angle they went for was hero plumber loved by celebrities humiliating old and vulnerable people getting money under false pretences and faking his twitter posts. It was about his work rather than his racism and bullying.
Not saying I agree with or defend the BBCs decision to do this, but I can understand why they did. Hopefully there will be follow ups by the BBC and/or other media organisations to do a deep dive into the suspicions some people had for years but how Jimmy was allowed to actually prosper with his bullshit.
Sometimes I want to delete all social media from my life then I see these sorts of comments hahahaha
Attachments
At the risk of a massive me-rail, I’ve watched episodes of BBC NI’s flagship Spotlight programme where I’ve known the story and the criminals involved, and I’ve seen where the conclusion of the narrative has clearly been cut by Legal in the moments before air. The idea that Anderson has a legitimate complaint regarding BBC sources is laughable. I agree, they’ve told a story of lies & exploitation (and touched on misuse of funds) and it has cut through: the general public is outraged. I do believe the rest will follow.
Absolute cowboy
Attachments
I’d also like to point out that the BBC quite correctly haven’t mentioned any of their sources and have focused - for the time being at least - on those issues which were plainest and easier to prove i.e. Jimmy’s lies, fraud and manipulation on his own posts and other sources in the public domain, such as his company accounts and crowdfunders. MG may have shared that the BBC were in touch, and that is her prerogative, but it would not be right or ethical of BBC to credit who first broke this story or whom they have contacted, especially if it was BWC, as they have experienced racial and misogynistic harassment over this in the past. The BBC would not want to be party to them being the target of yet more harassment and may well have been warned off contacting them by legal for this very reason - to protect them, not to intentionally sideline them.
I may of course be giving the BBC too much credit here, but as an ex-journalist you are trained to protect your sources and anticipate what the consequences might be of their involvement, and try to mitigate that. And as a public broadcaster, the BBC have to be extra-careful.
I may of course be giving the BBC too much credit here, but as an ex-journalist you are trained to protect your sources and anticipate what the consequences might be of their involvement, and try to mitigate that. And as a public broadcaster, the BBC have to be extra-careful.
Yes very good points.
Also the BBC can't antipicate how programmes will be received. People might have stood up for Jimmy en masse and turned on identifiable whistleblowers.
As it is that didn't happen and now his main detractors feel ignored, but if it had gone the other way it might seem the BBC had thrown them to the wolves.
I think the BBC have done the right thing in bringing awareness to some of the legally tight issues because they’ve at least shone a bright light in Depher’s direction. Most importantly it may bring an immediate halt to him putting people at risk and cease the public funding. It should also push the relevant authorities into undertaking proper investigations because it is now an international story.
The rest will follow as people start to come forward to give their accounts of dealing with him/being on the receiving end of his online behaviour. I imagine it will evolve and run for a while especially now people have begun speaking out.
The rest will follow as people start to come forward to give their accounts of dealing with him/being on the receiving end of his online behaviour. I imagine it will evolve and run for a while especially now people have begun speaking out.
Seconded. It MUST be this.
Omg.
So this elderly couple who Jimmy first implied were his parents, then said they were a couple he saved from #freezing cold for #nothing are this person's grandparents.
(100% seems legit - the person lives in Burnley).
1. It took you two days to come up with this
2. The BBC deliberately didn't include where Joyce lived in the documentary, why are you telling everybody more personal information about her?
3. Why didn't you say this on GB News or to the BBC?
4. Surely you could evidence to the BBC that this story happened, that there was a police report etc. of this nature about somebody?
5. The BBC verified all the information independently from your own social media accounts.
6. You literally said it wasn't true, Jimmy.
7. Even if this was the case, you still raises funds under false pretenses and that's criminal.
I could go on. This was just one of the issues raised.
2. The BBC deliberately didn't include where Joyce lived in the documentary, why are you telling everybody more personal information about her?
3. Why didn't you say this on GB News or to the BBC?
4. Surely you could evidence to the BBC that this story happened, that there was a police report etc. of this nature about somebody?
5. The BBC verified all the information independently from your own social media accounts.
6. You literally said it wasn't true, Jimmy.
7. Even if this was the case, you still raises funds under false pretenses and that's criminal.
I could go on. This was just one of the issues raised.
So now he's saying that the lady in Preston was real, it just wasn't Joyce 
Get Jeremy Vine up to Preston going door to door with his helmet cam.
And right, when Jim posts a photo of him and an elderly woman alongside a caption of how he saved an elderly woman from a suicidal act, we and the BBC are all the morons for thinking "maybe that is the same old lady"
Get Jeremy Vine up to Preston going door to door with his helmet cam.
And right, when Jim posts a photo of him and an elderly woman alongside a caption of how he saved an elderly woman from a suicidal act, we and the BBC are all the morons for thinking "maybe that is the same old lady"
Conveniently forgets to address how the story changes every time he tells it as well. 
Complete lack of apology for the false use of images, exploitation of vulnerable people, sharing of people's personal information of any of the other egregious things he's been evidenced of doing.
Up at half 6 typing out that nonsense.
Complete lack of apology for the false use of images, exploitation of vulnerable people, sharing of people's personal information of any of the other egregious things he's been evidenced of doing.
Up at half 6 typing out that nonsense.
- Status