Page 6 | Philip Schofield

rainbowstardrops · 2023-05-20T14:11:59+00:00

Just seen on Instagram that PS is stepping down with immediate effect from This morning! I mean, I'm not that bothered but there's been lots of speculation recently re his brother's conviction and the rumoured spat with Holly but I thought it would probably all blow over. I'm sure he's got a bob or two --is loaded-- but I'm still a bit surprised if I'm honest.

SprinkleOfSunak · 20/05/2023 17:34

Was there definitely a super injunction? I have never read about Phillip being in the courts other than in connection with his Brother. Or is it all just gossip and speculation? Are there any concrete articles on this?

I have never heard of the above, or anything regarding MM in the printed press or on the news, only on gossip websites, which I am not a fan of. I only checked out the story because friends were discussing it, and I was shocked.

It does seem strange how there is so much dodgy stuff about him online though, which obviously seems suspicious.

I would love to think none of it is true, as it means at least one young person has been put through a traumatic ordeal.

ThreeTrebles · 20/05/2023 17:34

@AnnWithoutAnnie

His brother has been jailed for 12 years for abusing a child. The abuse began when the boy was 13. There's no doubt it was child abuse.

PS said in court that his brother had told him (some of) what had happened, but that the boy was over 16 at the time.

DarkDarkNight · 20/05/2023 17:35

He’s been clinging on with everything he’s got, it comes across as a bit desperate. I’m sure he hoped it would all just blow over like the runner and the Queen skipping the line thing. Clearly from the statement ITV wanted rid.

Highfivemum · 20/05/2023 17:36

Having no not heard anything about any issues in the last couple of weeks this came as a surprise to me. So what has happened. I am googling madly now to see

AnnWithoutAnnie · 20/05/2023 17:41

ThreeTrebles · 20/05/2023 17:34

@AnnWithoutAnnie

His brother has been jailed for 12 years for abusing a child. The abuse began when the boy was 13. There's no doubt it was child abuse.

PS said in court that his brother had told him (some of) what had happened, but that the boy was over 16 at the time.

Oh right, poor kid 🥲

Qbish · 20/05/2023 17:43

SprinkleOfSunak · 20/05/2023 17:34

Was there definitely a super injunction? I have never read about Phillip being in the courts other than in connection with his Brother. Or is it all just gossip and speculation? Are there any concrete articles on this?

I have never heard of the above, or anything regarding MM in the printed press or on the news, only on gossip websites, which I am not a fan of. I only checked out the story because friends were discussing it, and I was shocked.

It does seem strange how there is so much dodgy stuff about him online though, which obviously seems suspicious.

I would love to think none of it is true, as it means at least one young person has been put through a traumatic ordeal.

You can't report on a super injunction. That's the whole point of it.

WildFlowerBees · 20/05/2023 17:44

You don't get 12 years in prison for engaging in sexual activity with a consenting adult.

Micksdottir · 20/05/2023 17:44

Marshmallowmatcha and all those other posters who have been discussing Philipo Schofield's alleged super-injunction: there isn't any kind of injunction, super or otherwise. If there had been an injunction in place, MN would have been legally obliged to remove all references to the conduct that posters are speculating he has been trying to cover up. And if a super-injunction had been in place it would have been contempt of court to even mention its existence. As for the often-repeated suggestion on here that said injunction is costing him £30,000 a month to keep in place (that's two week's wages for him), well, as any lawyer will confirm, that's nonsense.

An injunctioin costs whatever it costs to prepare the case, go into court to argue for it, and, whether successful or not, that's it. An injunction stays in place through merit, and the prerogative of a judge, not by some sort of hire purchase!
However, one possible scenario - and here I'm being cautious so as not to out myself - is this: Suppose a public figure, say a morning TV presenter, is given genuine cause for concern that a person who had been very close to him is prerparing to disc;lose deeply personal details of their hitherto secret although perfectly legal relationship. Said TV presenter, whose private connections and, shall we say, preferences, outside his marriage have been kept a closely guarded secret from his fan base for years, negotiates a legally binding non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with this other person. No court would need to be involved but in a situatioin like this money would almost certainly change hands in exchange for silence. There may even be other conditions imposed in the agreement, like a no-contact clause.
Does that seem much more likely to those MNers who havent already convinced themselves of non-existent injunctions and other fantasies? Just sayin'.

AnnWithoutAnnie · 20/05/2023 17:45

Jarstastic · 20/05/2023 17:22

Although the age of consent is 16, the law now says vulnerable under 18. Social services would have to be informed.

Show quote history

That makes no sense. It's either the age of consent or it's not.

they won't return a 16 year old home if they don't want to go. It's the legal age of consent.

we need to look at all the age restrictions and get some balance.

CherryRipe1 · 20/05/2023 17:46

Jumped before pushed. Strange to 'step down' on a Saturday but timing is crucial in tv propaganda. Watch out for the papers tomorrow, supposedly more to come out.

Meili04 · 20/05/2023 17:48

Doesn't a crime overrule an NDA anyway ?

Over40Overdating · 20/05/2023 17:48

@AnnWithoutAnnie the abused boy was 13 when the offences started. There may also be other factors which make the abuse worse in this instance.

Milkand2sugarsplease · 20/05/2023 17:50

I don't really watch it and have only seen bits in the headlines but who has he gone over Holly? I don't really understand it all but surely if they've fallen out it shouldn't just be up to one to resign??

Bluevelvetsofa · 20/05/2023 17:50

R We Buy Any Car dropped him pretty quickly and he doesn’t do the gin club adverts any more.

Both of them have been known as difficult to work with and demanding, but the public, friendly personas that had kept them together for so many years were fractured, especially after the stories about the runner and his brother’s court case and sentencing. For many, their queue jumping at the Queen’s lying in state was appalling, particularly as many other well known people queued with the general public. They never really overcame that.

He allegedly didn’t like Amanda Holden as a co presenter, so she couldn’t stay and a similar thing with Eammon Holmes and Ruth Langsford and they were sidelined. Rylan Clark suddenly disappeared from This Morning too.

They’re speaking of him still hosting the Soap Awards and another prime time programme later this year. I really hope not. Time for his sidekick, whose remarks following his ‘resignation’ were icy.

Namechange9625 · 20/05/2023 17:53

This is just the beginning I feel. He's pissed off a lot of industry "nice guys" who don't normally wade in on bitching, often maintaining a dignified silence. They've been extremely vocal.

FatAgain · 20/05/2023 17:55

After watching the documentary the other night I thought that Emma Willis would be really good, empathetic and professional. Anybody agree?

LizzieSiddal · 20/05/2023 17:55

I can’t believe he’s supposed to be hosting the Soap awards, I expect he won’t in the end because if people don’t want to watch him on This Morning, why would they want to watch him doing that?!

AnnWithoutAnnie · 20/05/2023 17:56

Over40Overdating · 20/05/2023 17:48

@AnnWithoutAnnie the abused boy was 13 when the offences started. There may also be other factors which make the abuse worse in this instance.

@Over40Overdating

you to you & the other people who replied to me. Poor kid 🥲

someone else just said under 18's are considered 'vulnerable' & reportable anyway.

it's an utter disgrace, I'm glad his brother has gone to prison.

lovescats3 · 20/05/2023 17:58

Holly needs to go too , so smug and patronising and fake smiles all the time

wildthingsinthenight · 20/05/2023 17:59

FatAgain · 20/05/2023 17:55

After watching the documentary the other night I thought that Emma Willis would be really good, empathetic and professional. Anybody agree?

Yes I do

Allschoolsareartschools · 20/05/2023 17:59

Housewife2010 · 20/05/2023 16:02

It's a shame that Vernon in on radio 2 now. He was great on This Morning and loved Gary Davies when he hosted Ken Bruce's old slot.

Oh yes, this crossed my mind too! I actually like Vernon on TM & definitely preferred Gary Davies on the radio.

lovescats3 · 20/05/2023 18:01

Holly must have known about his relationship with the runner in the show

MyLeftShoeLeaksSockGrease · 20/05/2023 18:06

Micksdottir · 20/05/2023 17:44

Marshmallowmatcha and all those other posters who have been discussing Philipo Schofield's alleged super-injunction: there isn't any kind of injunction, super or otherwise. If there had been an injunction in place, MN would have been legally obliged to remove all references to the conduct that posters are speculating he has been trying to cover up. And if a super-injunction had been in place it would have been contempt of court to even mention its existence. As for the often-repeated suggestion on here that said injunction is costing him £30,000 a month to keep in place (that's two week's wages for him), well, as any lawyer will confirm, that's nonsense.

An injunctioin costs whatever it costs to prepare the case, go into court to argue for it, and, whether successful or not, that's it. An injunction stays in place through merit, and the prerogative of a judge, not by some sort of hire purchase!
However, one possible scenario - and here I'm being cautious so as not to out myself - is this: Suppose a public figure, say a morning TV presenter, is given genuine cause for concern that a person who had been very close to him is prerparing to disc;lose deeply personal details of their hitherto secret although perfectly legal relationship. Said TV presenter, whose private connections and, shall we say, preferences, outside his marriage have been kept a closely guarded secret from his fan base for years, negotiates a legally binding non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with this other person. No court would need to be involved but in a situatioin like this money would almost certainly change hands in exchange for silence. There may even be other conditions imposed in the agreement, like a no-contact clause.
Does that seem much more likely to those MNers who havent already convinced themselves of non-existent injunctions and other fantasies? Just sayin'.

The super injunction stuff has never sounded plausible to me. A NDA however…that certainly does.

TerfIngOnTheBeach · 20/05/2023 18:08

Glad he’s gone, Mr Self Self Self. On the fence over Holly, I wonder how much she really knew and when she knew it from. I would like to find out more about her before I make a judgment.

LizzieSiddal · 20/05/2023 18:10

lovescats3 · Today 17:58
Holly needs to go too , so smug and patronising and fake smiles all the time

Agree plus she’s not very bright either. Judy Finnigan and Fern Britain were proper journalists.