Not trying to say Noel is the victim, not initially anyway, he was 100% in the wrong at aged 18. But that was about 32 years ago, a lot has happened in their relationship since that initial illegal act. I just think that what he did when he was 18 could have forced him to be tied to Sue for life, because if he chooses to leave, she can then report his crime, which has never appeared to have concerned her before, to the police. I think she is hard nosed and what may have started as him doing an illegal act could be used by her to control him later on. I actually think both sets of parents were responsible as when they found out about the relationship it appears they did nothing to stop it. I can understand the logic in allowing Noel contact with baby Chris, and part of that would be to encourage him to financially contribute…but both sets of parents should have been firm on Noel and Sue not having any contact directly with each other. Sue’s parents especially should have seen it as abuse and not just a young relationship. Noel’s parents should have been firm with him to protect him from ending up in jail. Same as with Noel and Sue, if the inferred allegations about Daniel turn out to be true, should be putting massive effort right now into supporting him so he is rehabilitated and reducing the risk in future to himself and his future partners. I fear Noel and Sue will just do as their parents did and express mild disappointment and then get distracted and forget about it without dealing with it effectively. If no one makes a big fuss about the wrongdoing with serious consequences meted out by the family, the wrong-doer will play down the seriousness of the offence in their own mind because nobody else is particularly bothered so why should they be? I think that is what happened, Noel probably understood the age gap was wrong, but there was nobody there reinforcing to him how severely wrong his actions were…his actions were just accepted and his relationship with Sue was allowed to continue.
We will probably never know how Noel feels in retrospect, does he not care and think his behaviour was normal, does he feel disgusted with himself, or does he look back and it not feel real and not quite understand why he felt it was acceptable at the time. It’s when he sees his own daughters at 13 that it surely must hit him how young Sue was and wrong it must have been viewing it in retrospect. Maybe he cannot bring himself to think about it and analyse it in hindsight.
What’s also weird is that the tv shows and sponsors can find the information so easily that Noel committed statutory rape, yet are still willing to work with him. That is the what I find most bizarre, these companies have no morals.
As for the row with Chris where the tv came off the wall, that could literally have been about anything at all, no reason to assume it had anything to do with the statuary rape issue. They don’t seem very keen on adults moving out and starting their own lives, Chloe
and Millie appear to have left amongst rows, so same with Chris it could just have been a combination of things that led to that incident…I think living in that house could try anyone’s patience.
I wonder if any of the kids have been bullied at school specifically due to Noel’s statutory rape, or parents, especially of female school friends, have banned them from visiting the house due to concerns about whether Noel could be a risk to children. I can image a lot of questions from the kids that Noel and Sue will want to avoid answering.
Noel was very lucky that Sue’s parents didn’t react differently, instead of a publicly praised dad of 22, he could have ended up in prison and with a criminal records for sex offences and labelled as a danger to minors for the rest of his life, if it wasn’t for them being so mild about it all.
Sue showed her true colours for me in her handling of the sausage roll woman. Instead of making a statement putting right any untruths or admitting to which parts were true..she resorted to bullying and encouraging others to help her do so. There is a nastiness in Sue that I don’t see in Noel, which is not to say that it did not start the other way round. To me he just seems a bit wet, it is Sue who is the hard nosed one. But like with all YouTube families…we don’t know if he can turn on and off behaviour at the same rate he turns on and off a camera.
If I met Noel, for example as a customer if I worked in a shop…I wouldn’t feel apprehensive about dealing with him, but I would with Sue, because I think she can get very nasty right in people’s faces without thinking through the consequences and could escalate to that in seconds, if she isn’t getting her own way, whereas Noel would probably go home and write a polite whinge letter.
I wouldn’t trust either of them alone with my
kids, I don’t think Noel is a danger to random children, but as he has form you could never be 100% certain, and Sue I would not trust to actually bother herself to watch a child, keep them safe, or not to have a temper flare ups for barely any reason. I’d honestly trust some of the older girls with childcare more than I’d trust Sue and Noel, which must say something bad considering they are in theory the most experienced parents in Britain.
remember the vlog where someone told Bonnie to read a story and then handed her a colouring book lol. Whenever they film night routines they read to the kids and they look bewildered, can't sit still, don't seem to know how books work really. They have a few tatted picture books, no chapter books for the older ones or nice gift books. They clearly haven't grown up with a love of reading because none of the older ones read and nobody in that house has any knowledge of grammar and spelling.
