Scott Mills

[PickledRadish]

i can understand your point for sure and yes of course some horrible people make things up (and i hate them just as much as abusers) BUT he’s been investigated by the police to the point a case was presented to the cps AND sacked from his job, those things aren’t going to both happen without some sort of proof.

I personally have seen both sides, i’ve been the victim of CSA for 8 long years of my childhood and because i was so frightened and confused about what happened to me by the time i reported it, it was essentially too late. The cps refused the case due to my mental state at the time (due to the abuse) and the fact id left it so long there was no “concrete” evidence but it happened and it was real and the officers even said we know he’s done it but without the cps we can’t do anything.

I’ve lived my whole life with that and from the other side someone who i was extremely close to was accused of SA and at first i didn’t want to believe it either because “surely not?!” but yes, they did do it even though there was no criminal conviction again and they also got sacked so both of these are why i am so “there’s no smoke with out fire” type of opinion.

Im sorry (not sorry at all actually) but i honestly think a lot of you will be ashamed when you others step forward and more comes out.

I am really sorry to hear what you suffered during your childhood That is awful and I hope that whilst the scars remain you've found some peace in the years since then.

I do understand your points as well, 100% - but I don't think anyone who is reserving judgment and not rushing to brandish SM as an abuser at the present moment needs to feel ashamed for having done so and waited for more information

 

[Traazers]

There isn't a massive amount of celeb support for him on social media. Mind you, Jeremy Vine should wind his neck in a bit, given that he was the first one to support Huw Edwards after his sacking!

As Tattle's no1 (only?) Jeremy Vine fan, I want to point out that the article shared yesterday stating Vine had said XYZ were actually discussion points raised on his radio show, the topics of which are chosen by production in advance. He didn't give any personal opinion on the matter at all he was asking questions laid out in advance in order to facilitate a debate/discussion.

 

[GingerJones50]

[

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.

 

[Magwitch]

That's it. When clubbing we trust the door men to do their job correctly and keep out those underage. We aren't going to ask someone in a club if we can see their photo ID to kill the mood. Women especially can easily make themselves look way older with make up and clothes. It would be quite easy for someone to end up kissing someone who shouldn't be in there, especially with booze involved.

There has always been underage sex stories in the press about people getting picked up on nights out.

Bloody hell, I've seen some crazy stuff on here today, but this is beyond. No, it is not up to bouncers to help prevent you from groping a minor! If you think someone might be underage you absolutely can and should ask to see some ID, or, you know, just leave them alone, despite the fact that it might 'kill the mood'.

 

[Tofino]

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.

Where have you got this from? This is not what the BBC’s statement said.

 

[Tangerine Cat]

Wow a lot of you are really trying to make excuses for the fact that he was involved with a CHILD. And by involved I mean groomed/abused. I don’t care how many years ago it was. That’s ducked UP.

I apologise if any of my posts have appeared that way, they certainly haven’t meant to be. Trouble is we have so little information it throws up so many questions and we’re just debating it all.

Today I feel really shocked, with Savile and even Schofield there was plenty of evidence to see it must be true (with Schofield there were loads of tweets of youngish boys thanking him for tours around the studio on twitter, it doesn’t take a genius to see he had questions to answer about his behaviour), but Scott’s always seemed decent.

whatever, I hope the truth is exposed so he can either get back to his life or be punished.

 

[Happy Alpaca]

Just resharing the latest info from the BBC news page, as I find it easier to refer back to screenshots...

 

[HotesTilaire]

It sounds like at some point between the investigation and now, Mills has had communication with the victim, probably online, and not been very pleasant to him.

It doesn’t say this.
You might suggest that as a theory but it’s not what the article sounds like.

 

[KatLit]

As Tattle's no1 (only?) Jeremy Vine fan, I want to point out that the article shared yesterday stating Vine had said XYZ were actually discussion points raised on his radio show, the topics of which are chosen by production in advance. He didn't give any personal opinion on the matter at all he was asking questions laid out in advance in order to facilitate a debate/discussion.

Before the discussion on his show he called the sacking "unfair". That is not impartial.

 

[charlied0106]

Bloody hell, I've seen some crazy stuff on here today, but this is beyond. No, it is not up to bouncers to help prevent you from groping a minor! If you think someone might be underage you absolutely can and should ask to see some ID, or, you know, just leave them alone, despite the fact that it might 'kill the mood'.

Oh come on, youre nitpicking here. You know fine well, what allseeingeye is saying. Obviously if somebody looks young, acts young or seems young you won't go there. But I think the point they are making is people do look and act older and especially if they are in a nightclub or a bar. You wouldn't think to question someone who you perceive to be of age. Especially if you are only late teens or early twenties yourself, you assume they are about the same age as you. I do think it's a bit different if it is someone of that age, being chatted up or going with a middle aged person. If they are young enough to be your child, then that raises questions, if you perceive him to be your peer, then it is a lot more muddy.

 

[WhyYouCry?]

So much discussion over snogging underage people in nightclubs and bars, but I can’t see the relevance to an accusation of serious sexual assault over a period of 3 years.

 

[L3moning]

But I think the point they are making is people do look and act older and especially if they are in a nightclub or a bar. You wouldn't think to question someone who you perceive to be of age.

Which is why the law is written as it is, and includes a defence for that.

 

[pixxyy]

I'm sure more will come out on how they met and the alleged victims exact age.

As atm the only facts seem to be serious sexual offences over a time period of 3 years
Separate allegation of inappropriate messages ( which has no timeline so could be from when it happened or recent, also inappropriate covers alot of options)

 

[LadyLockdown]

Does not sound knee-jerk to me?


Full BBC Statement

“Scott Mills had a long career across the BBC, he was hugely popular and we know the news this week has come as a shock and surprise to many.

“We also recognise there’s been much speculation in the media and online since Monday. We hope people understand that there is a limit to what we can say because we have to be mindful of the rights of those involved.

“What we can confirm is that in recent weeks, we obtained new information relating to Scott and we spoke directly with him. As a result, the BBC acted decisively in line with our culture and values and terminated his contracts on Friday 27 March.

“The BBC has made a significant commitment to improve its culture, processes and standards. Last year, following an independent culture review, we set out the behavioural expectations for everyone who works with or for the BBC and we were clear action would be taken if these were not met.

“Separately, we can confirm the BBC was made aware in 2017 of the existence of an ongoing police investigation, which was subsequently closed in 2019 with no arrest or charge being made. We are doing more work to understand the detail of what was known by the BBC at this time.”

Based on that bit, whatever he said when they spoke to him was enough for them to part ways with him.

 

[Tangerine Cat]

How is it OK if he was 15 when it started? It's not OK now and wasn't then. I was a teenager in the 90s. I know how often it happened. It was never legal or OK. We weren't as grown up as we thought we were, didn't really look it, the men who dated us knew that, and the men we 'got off with' in clubs probably didn't genuinely believe us to be older, or care.

All that is irrelevant as I'd bet good money this was a grooming situation where the age of the victim was well known to the offender. A one off incident in/after a club would have been very unlikely, 16 years later, to spark a police investigation that was open for multiple years and resulted in a file being passed to the CPS. There wouldn't have been the evidence for it to get even that far.

I didn’t say it was ok! I’m referring to the ‘three years’ part of the police statement and wondering what it could mean.

I think people are making too many assumptions about what others are posting now which is just going to lead to arguments and derail the thread.

 

[pommynoir]

View attachment 3943591

duck me some people shouldn’t be allowed the internet

 

[GingerJones50]

I have friends who have experienced SA and at least two have reported it to the police. I’m aware in one case, the police were struggling to move forward with making an arrest etc on the basis of what my friend reported alone, however, there sadly were others who were unknown to each other but all making very similar reports which was beginning to build a much stronger case. I suppose the same might happen here, if there are others. I know before this got its own thread that someone in the celeb thread mentioned a friend who was groomed by SM, and obviously it’s unclear if this is the same person as the centre of the current news or someone different.

For anyone who has experienced SA, I can only say how sorry I am. And for those who have been able to find the strength to report it, I’m in awe. It’s easy for me to sit on the sidelines and say that it might help build a watertight case against an abuser but I can’t imagine the pain of being told it won’t be progressed at that point in time.

Oh I’ve experienced it. Was groomed by a group linked to a major sports club when underage and nasty stuff happened. I was recruited by a girl at my school and she was recruited by a girl who was married to her brother and also having sex with these sportsmen (yuk!). The sister-in-law also went to our school and had initially been targeted while there and underage too, I think she was only about 20. I have no idea how the link with my school came about.

There’s 3 of who are in contact and could make a complaint if we wanted. We can describe the insides of their homes and bedrooms and the location and also know the night clubs they went to and when and details of their personal lives. But it happened in the mid 90s, the group of men involved have all gone their separate ways and probably aren’t doing it anymore because they don’t have the fame that allowed them to do it. It wouldn’t achieve anything and would up end our lives and traumatise our children so we’ve decided just to move on.

I know there will be people reading this who think I just made it up!

But because I’ve been through it myself, something gets my spidey senses jingling about people. Although we don’t know enough about what’s supposed to have happened in this case for me to make my mind up one way or another what’s happened anyway. But at the height of the Jimmy Savile thing, there were some people saying he’d done things to them who just seemed to want to go on ‘This Morning’ to talk about and get a night in a hotel and a day out in London for free. All the allegations were accepted without question so anybody could say ‘Jimmy Savile did something to me’ and then do the rounds of TV shows and sell stories to papers.

 

[pommynoir]

I didn’t realise SM was so liked until I read this thread.

none of us know exactly what he’s done but go on any other thread with similar circumstances and people would have been against them from the start.

And if I see another comment that “things were different back then” I may put my head through the window. If you’ve had a relationship with someone under 16 you’re a pon, if you’ve been under 16 and had a relationship with someone older then you were nonced - it’s really that simple. There is zero circumstances where that’s ok, even if it was the wild 90’s.

 

[Bread]

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.

Eh? Where is all this coming from?

 

[Bread]

But at the height of the Jimmy Savile thing, there were some people saying he’d done things to them who just seemed to want to go on ‘This Morning’ to talk about and get a night in a hotel and a day out in London for free. All the allegations were accepted without question so anybody could say ‘Jimmy Savile did something to me’ and then do the rounds of TV shows and sell stories to papers.

Honestly, it worries me how many people believe this kind of thing.