Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

Bread

VIP Member
Ah yes - forgot that bit.

It's so odd that he doesn't mention it. The statement is a bit - hopeless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

DaniellaCruz

VIP Member
Perhaps Scott told them about the allegation, but not the age of the allegator? (Alleger?)
I heard the bbc were alerted in 2018 and kept him on until recently when further details reemerged. It also has not been denied by SM. Ithink they way peoplr gave jumolped to defend him us dangerous knowing its a boy as thw alledged victim. People need to be careful running in defence about innocent until proven guilty. Not necessarily.
I think it wouldve died down if people didnt all speak in defence of him. Either way is he even popular?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

plattyjoobs

VIP Member
I've just checked on DM and the story is still there, I found the story of SM no longer suppoting Boyzone gig and it was one of the headlines linked on that page, it behind a paywall but its still there;
Why Scott Mills' accuser came forward, the fall-out for his celebrity friends, 'trouble' around booze and the anger, wailing and devastation inside Radio 2. Insiders tell all to KATIE HIND
First time trying to archive, hopefully this links to it

 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

Bread

VIP Member
Right - so basically the "guy whose wife left him because of his clingfilm fetish" is a piss take. Dear lord.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

Lola123

VIP Member
really surprised at how quiet it is, no real details have come out. He hasnt been spotted so I assume hes taken himself off somewhere abroad.

On The Rest is entertainment last week they implied they couldn't talk about it - not that they didn't want to, but that they were prevented from doing so. so maybe talk of an injunction isn't too far away from the truth.
Or because Richard wants to maintain his good relationship with the BBC he’s kept his mouth quiet! Is he still a BBC employee? Even though he isn’t doing house of games anymore?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

GingerJones50

VIP Member
[
That’s an interesting suggestion, but it’s not what is said in that piece.
That piece is old and not what is happening now. There’s no indication that they’ve found other victims either.

He wasn’t sacked over the allegation or investigation because the BBC were aware of it and let him keep his job. The same victim has now approached the BBC with a fresh set of allegations about something totally seperate which is what he’s been sacked for.

If it’s related to the information that a journalist approached the BBC with last year, it would appear he has been involved with ‘harassing or inappropriate communications’ with the alleged victim more recently.

It is possible that the journalists information is not linked, but the BBC have confirmed the journalist approached them and said they failed by not investigating the allegations at the time, so it does appear to be linked to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

GingerJones50

VIP Member
This was in an article in the Daily Mail on 5th April;

He was fired nine days ago after bosses were made aware that the alleged victim of a serious sexual offences probe against Mills in 2017 was under 16. It was confirmed last week that the accusations related to a male who was aged between 13 and 16 at the time of the alleged offences, which are said to have run from 1997 into the 2000s, when Mills was in his 20s.

I guess SM would sue the arse off the DM if this was not true? 🤷‍♀️
I’m not getting any result through that link so maybe the story has been pulled? The DM reporting has been absolutely appalling on this. Last week they confidently claimed Mills had been sacked because he hadn’t told the BBC about the police investigation which the BBC has confirmed was untrue.

The best reporting on this seems to be coming from the Mirror, evrn though I don’t usually rate thrm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

GingerJones50

VIP Member
It could have been a friend of theirs, it doesn’t have to be the parent, it could be they stopped contacting him when the parents found out, could have been a teacher or the school too! There’s loads of people the first allegation the police got given could have come from
It could well be. Which is why I said probably in my original post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

pixxyy

VIP Member
It's not clear whether the initial enquiry, which was raised due to something someone working at the BBC disclosed to this journalist, was about the same individual*

The Mirror does say the information is regarding the same person as the investigation concerned

* though with how quiet it all is I doubt this is a case where there are many victims
Thanks I thought i'd read that but then started doubting myself
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

cazellie

VIP Member
I listened to Romesh yesterday on Radio 2. At one point he said goodbye to a caller and said love you to which Sally Traffic asked why he always said that. He said it was in the hope someone would say the same back. Sally said what empty words it was. Scott always says ‘love you, bye’ to callers so maybe a coincidence
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

Sakkiedekock

VIP Member
It's not far off nowadays; it bears little resemblance to the high-quality news source it was a couple of decades ago.

My personal view is that any organization prepared to pay for, and publish, the opinions of Owen Jones is a risible rag, but I do concede that there may be some people out there who are keen to read his thoughts on important matters.
Marina was a Sun Journalist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2

GingerJones50

VIP Member
New information that is different to the claims in the police investigation, is not the same as “a fresh set of allegations about something totally separate”, which is what your earlier post said.
It was reported quite widely before the BBC made the statement that it was a new set of allegations that were separate. The BBC statement is ambiguous because the way they’ve worded it suggests that it could possibly be related to the first set of allegations. That doesn’t seem very likely because if there was bombshell new evidence Mills was guilty they would have referred him to the police and the case would have been reopened which hasn’t happened. In this case ‘different’ almost certainly means something new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1