When you get AI to look at the allegations and assess their seriousness - I don't understand why people don't think this is serious.
Sexual contact with a 15-year-old. “Jade” alleges that in 2007 he kissed her, made sexual contact with her breast and tried to put her hand down his trousers. Potentially criminal. Sexual touching by an adult of someone he knows is 15 is a child sexual offence, even if she appears to agree. Sexual assault may also apply where there is no consent. Intercourse is not necessary for either offence.
Requesting sexual photographs from a 17-year-old. “Alex” says he pressured her to send sexual photographs, including naked pictures, and directed her poses. Potentially criminal under child-image laws. The relevant age threshold is 18, despite the age of consent to sex being 16.
Pressuring and touching a vulnerable young adult. [Name redacted by me to avoid her being search trap] was 18 when they met and alleges he repeatedly pressured her to share his bed and pawed at her while she was staying with him. The alleged touching could be criminal, depending on its nature and consent, under the sexual-offence law applicable at the time.
An unwanted attempted kiss and physical touching. “Ella”, first contacted at 19, says he cornered her for a kiss and later touched her against her wishes.
Possibly criminal, depending on the precise actions and intent. Sexual assault requires intentional sexual touching without consent and without a reasonable belief in consent.
Unwanted advances towards an 18-year-old, followed by an attempt to lead her towards his bedroom while she was drunk. “Sarah” alleges leg-stroking, grabbing her waist and attempting to kiss her. She says her friend intervened on the stairs. The alleged sexual touching could amount to sexual assault, subject to the consent test above.
Sexual harassment of staff. Allegations at Britain’s Got Talent and HarperCollins include unwanted messages and approaches, sexualised comments about women’s bodies and staring at a worker’s chest.
Potentially unlawful workplace sexual harassment. Unwanted sexual behaviour that violates someone’s dignity or creates an intimidating or degrading environment can breach equality law. This can apply without physical touching. It is generally an employment/civil-law matter, although associated assault or criminal harassment would be separate offences.
Cultivating a relationship with a girl from 15, then having sex with her at 17. “Alex” alleges that offers of career support developed into a sexual relationship. She describes the sex as consensual but believes she was groomed. Not automatically criminal on those facts. Consensual sex at 17 is ordinarily lawful. Celebrity status or informal mentoring does not automatically create the legally defined “position of trust” that makes some relationships with 16- and 17-year-olds illegal.
A sexual relationship with a junior HarperCollins employee. The relationship is described as consensual, but the woman reportedly later regarded it as an abuse of power. Not automatically criminal. A consensual relationship with an adult junior employee can raise serious professional and ethical concerns. An imbalance in status does not, by itself, establish a sexual offence.
Being alone with teenage fans behind a closed dressing-room door. Abby Tomlinson says she was 17 and accompanied by a 13-year-old. A separate employee describes finding young visitors with Walliams wearing a towel.
A safeguarding concern, rather than an offence established by those facts alone. Abby does not allege a sexual act in that encounter. Wearing a towel does not itself establish indecent exposure.
A threatening legal letter. Sarah’s friend received a solicitor’s warning about disclosing information concerning him. Threatening legitimate legal proceedings is not itself criminal. Abusive legal threats can raise regulatory or other legal issues, so the wording and purpose matter.
A £300 payment described as “hush money”. A production colleague used that description of a payment to a runner. Walliams says it was an ordinary staff tip. The payment and the colleague’s remark don't establish that he bought anyone’s silence.