Link to previous thread here:
Scott Mills
As suggested in the Celeb Gossip thread as it has become the Scott Mills thread.
tattle.life
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I wonder if we’ll ever know all the gory details?
For me the most compelling insight comes from the statement Scott issued after his dismissal.
No clear denial of the alleged offence.
He must be confident there is no strong evidence against him.
No clear denial of the alleged offence.
He must be confident there is no strong evidence against him.
Depends what his argument is. If he just says that they were unreasonable in sacking him or didn't follow process then I can't imagine much will come out.
It will likely all come out and possibly more. That could then be very damaging. No NDAs will protect anyone if theres a crime. Its obvious he may be owed wages and have a contract but of theres a crime it doesnt matter the contract.
I was a regular listener of Scott Mills but if I read some crime in paticular a minor no way would he be back.
I have had a couple of friends have past grape and sxual assault and it all came out 15-30 years later in court and one conviction but others came forward and other evidence and this is great for victims to feel they can be heard and supported. The truth is the truth and years on its hard to convict but absolutely doesnt mean it didnt happen but lots can come out and people get brave when they see rhe possibility of justice and have the strength to speak out years later.
He could be innocent and if he is it makes sense to fight but I think The BBC will likely be more than willing to fight it publically in court as they would likely have sought legal advice with their decisions. It seems rhet kept him on when they first heard so he was employed still.
Sometimes people around you can make you think its the right thing but if you did something criminal no matrer how far back it is still relevant The BBC have to be transparent the license fee is paid by the public its different to other employers.
I dont even know what it is he was meant to have done so from that point ofview surely for him that is better as hecan have a comeback later away from The BBC.
Look at all the people like Gregg who lirerally stpry after story was coming out and rhe internet is awash with stuff on him and he didnt sue did he?
Good post.
I think Scott may be making a mistake suing especially given that he never denied the allegations.
I think Scott may be making a mistake suing especially given that he never denied the allegations.
I get it when people can be wronged and you feel mad and upset I think we can all relate to a job where the employer does you wrong and you want to sue but you dont because your unsure how to navigate it or its just too much but ultimately whether you have to consider the mental toll on you too overtime if you take it on and moreso when its public. And The BBC. I remember that Stricley Come Dancing case and thay actress was talking about the show and a dancer and she seemed to get riddivuled and I domt even think thst went to court it was just she was brave to publicise it. Now it seems plenty of BBC complaints followed about SCD but the way there is such an attack on victims it must feel awful. Even reading it you get these articles focusing on the victim and character assasination and its like PR must pay journalists and media figures and it becomes more than the case.
I fully understand suing when wronged it just needs to be fully considered how things play out with public figures and big corps.
I am a simple sales woman and can go vack to another sales job. But a celebrity its all on show its like you are unable to innocently sit in a pub without a camera showing popping up to show how your feeling. Its documented as acwleb islike publuc property.
I hope he can find a way back and I dont think its impossible at all for him.
I don't think an employment tribunal really looks at whether someone has committed a crime, all they consider is whether due process was followed.
But surely a crime can be legitimate grounds for dismissal
It can if the employer considers it to be bringing them into disrepute, but in most cases they will wait until after the criminal process is complete before any disciplinary process, because if you sack someone who is then found not guitly then a tribunal isn't likely to be too favourable.
Absolutely but you still have to follow written policies regardless.
Rylan last night was getting really emotional on The Assembly when asked about friends being cancelled. It's worth a watch back on ITV X so you can feel the words and emotion, but The Sun have wrote about it.
Emotional Rylan Clark hits out about close friends being 'cancelled' after Scott Mills sacked by BBC
The Assembly - Series 2 - Episode 6 - ITVX
Emotional Rylan Clark hits out about close friends being 'cancelled' after Scott Mills sacked by BBC
The Assembly - Series 2 - Episode 6 - ITVX
Shame it isn’t easier to cancel people, too many scammers and abusers are allowed to carry on for far too long
Fond as I am of Rylan, he's on a sticky wicket with this one.
Which is why most employers do not wait for the conclusion of a criminal investigation, they use other reasons like “actions which bring the organisation into disrepute” or alternatively if you are found to have lied to them about it “breach of trust and confidence” of the employment contract.
And you don’t have to follow written policies. You should, ideally, but if you don’t and the outcome would have been dismissal in any case, the employee still might lose a tribunal, or win but receive no award or compensation.
I watched on YouTube. Rylan is clearly devastated about Scott's cancellation and is clearly still very much supporting him.
He said something like "you have to question people's motivation for cancelling people when they do, don't believe everything you read" (paraphrasing). So is Rylan insinuating Scott was thrown under the bus and there's more to this story?
I think the most compelling evidence is Scott’s dismissal statement.
Rylan is Scott’s pal and he is supportive and loyal to him.
Rylan does seem like a nice dude but who knows his motivation for speaking in apparent support of Scott.
TV is a fickle world, didn’t Rylan used to be bezzy pals with KP?
Rylan is Scott’s pal and he is supportive and loyal to him.
Rylan does seem like a nice dude but who knows his motivation for speaking in apparent support of Scott.
TV is a fickle world, didn’t Rylan used to be bezzy pals with KP?
Sam has posted an anniversary post. Comments so far from Rylan, Zoe, Sara and Katie Thistleton. There is clearly still a lot of love from friends and colleagues.
A lot of comments! Lots saying they miss him too. I miss his show