David Walliams

She openly supported him even after he was sacked. Just bantz, apparently.

No, that poster is saying it's not true that there is an allegation that he slept with a 15 year old, not that it's not true that he slept with a 15 year old.

The court case is published in the usual place in full discussing the human rights (art 2. 3 and 8 vs art 10) and the allegations are on the Guardian website - so watch it.

Not sure anymore what this thread is about.

According to the ITV documentary there are multiple women that claim they were groomed as teenagers plus multiple women at Harper Collins and other work places that say they were sexually harassed. Grooming and sexual harassment are crimes.

I agree. With the exception of the then 15-year-old, who hasn't made a formal complaint to the police, none of the other behaviour mentioned in the investigation is illegal. Sleazy, no question. Massive abuse of power, absolutely. I can't see it ending up in court.

Isn't that referring to when he called a contestant a cnut whilst backstage? Not the nonceing?

exactly.

Man has to believed simply because he “strenuously” denied it, yet woman has to explain in court why she “didn’t just rolled over” when her rapist (Brand) was anally raping her

or you can watch it on ITV X now.

It's being broadcast on ITV1 tonight at 10.50pm.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/ng-interactive/2026/nov/10/david-walliams-accused-sex-grooming-allegations-young-women

Just read the whole thing.

What a disgusting pos.

I do wonder how many men with the power to do so act in this way. I recall at the time of Sean Hughes death that there were stories circulating that in the MySpace days he would befriend young female fans and invite them to meet him for a day in London. I saw him at the soho theatre in the 2000s and he must have been late 30s early 40s then. He paid a lot of attention to a very young woman in the front row and started talking at length about how he just didn’t find women his own age attractive and that he still preferred much younger women and that he’d been upset at being paired with age appropriate women in acting jobs. Sure he’s a comedian but there seemed a genuine distain for older women there and a fixation on very young women. I do think he was a clever and funny comic but I think his attitudes towards women were a bit off and I was surprised all those stories about him just kind of disappeared as I did expect it to be spoken about more and I think now if you search it none of these things seem to come up.

Thank you! As I said earlier, no one wants MNHQ pulling these threads for claiming things that are presently unknown.

The story about the 15 year old he sexually assaulted is absolutely awful. She told him she had been sexually abused in the past and he goes on to sexually assault her. What a disgusting piece of shit he is.

One part of me agrees. Another part says it is men who are the issue, not the Beeb.

Everyone forgets about disc jockey John Peel which predates so many others.

Same, sadly, with Glen Hansard. I do get that both of these men are no longer alive to defend themselves. The stories about Glen are many and varied and "known" in Ireland.

It’s ’position of trust’ not position of power. And it is very tightly defined in the act, it’s basically teachers, sports coaches, youth group leaders, doctors etc.

A celebrity is not in a position of trust with their fans according to the act.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/abuse-of-position-of-trust

Even accounting for someone being a bad person, I don't understand why these men risk everything. Let's say you're a scumbag, but you have lots of talent and wealth and fame. Wouldn't you take care not to let your scumbaggery out? I just saw Walliams' 12m house. His kids' books were so popular, he had a TV career, multi-millions....I mean, I wouldn't have thought it very hard to simply go about your life without abusing people. I do it every day!!! Just leave younger people alone and don't do anything sexual without enthusiastic consent. And don't say sleazy stuff. It's not hard! I mean, I wouldn't do any of those things because I'm not a scumbag, but even if I was a scumbag, I'd keep a lid on it in order not to, you know, LOSE EVERYTHING. They're not very bright, are they.

The lack of reading comprehension on here sometimes really grinds my gears!

Possession of indecent images of a child under 16 has been an offence since at least 1978. This was then increased to the age of 18 in 2003.

"Also is accepting images a thing though"

Yes, very much. If you get sent an indecent image then you are in possession of it.

"...it’s not like a physical thing, it’s digital"

These days, the offence is usually charged as "making" an image. In the sense that a new digital copy of an original digital image has been made (just like when you "make" copies of physical images with a photocopier).

However, having said that, I would guess that although he might get a conviction for this that he won't go to prison. You may recall that Huw Edwards received a suspended sentence for receiving 41 images two years ago.

How about Walliams at these signings - is there not some responsibility with the bookshops and Harper Collins? He is taking the personal details of schoolgirls? What about Fremantle and Serco do they not have any responsibility towards young fans at BGT?

Maybe there should be a huge civil case if they can't nail a criminal accusation?

@KidsDoBetter I think I did hear rumblings about Glen Hansard and you’re correct that neither him nor Sean were around to defend themselves or face up to the allegations. It really does make you wonder though, just how wide spread this behaviour is.

In a surprise to NO ONE, the man who did a sketch called: 'Hide the Sausage' in which he played a children's entertainer sex abuser turns out to have been a predator. Who'd have thunk it ?

But the abuse of power is what makes it exciting for them.

A truly consenting sexual encounter with a person of a similar age just doesn't do it for people like this.

They need to feel they have the power, the control over a very very young person.

yes I keep seeing people saying he will be banged up with Russel brand and in court, but there is no criminal proceedings and he stayed the right side of the law apart from one fifteen year old who says he kissed her breast.

what he’s done is creepy, sleazy, he’s clearly into teens, but he has not broken the law apart from this one allegation.

its very unlikely there will be any criminal proceedings and if there was if he’d go to jail. This is simply his reputation and career is over.

he isn’t in the same league as brand who was raping and assaulting multiple women. This is more a sleazy grooming of 15 year olds then waiting till they are of age to go near them, apart from the one girl

yhere is the sexual images, but the woman has nothing to show he asked for those, even though she has the other messages.

I’m not sure, hw was clearly also making age appropriate relationships. It is not the case he solely targetted young teens, if anything his relationships were with age appropriate women,

david Walliams is very mentally unwell. It seems he was sexually attracted to these young women. But aware enough to wait till they reached the age of consent, but even then, he was successful with one or two, but no more.

the other women were mid twenties. And fully admit it was consensual