Page 7 | 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.

Inkpotlover · 20/05/2023 18:13

I wonder if it's all been rushed through today because one of the Sunday papers has a big story on him they are running tomorrow. Stepping down with immediate effect is quite something.

HadleyVaughn · 20/05/2023 18:14

@wheresmymojo

I heard that the series on Apple TV with Jennifer Aniston in - The Morning Show is based (very) loosely on PS and HW.

Is that "heard" as in you just made it up because you saw a few parallels right now this minute? Where did you "hear" that exactly?

It's well known that The Morning Show is based on NBC’s Today/ Matt Lauer and also inspired by Brian Stelters book. How likely is it that a major USA show about a breakfast show that started in 2019 with a main story line of a sexual harassment/ #metoo scandal is based on some crummy UK day time TV show?

https://time.com/5708304/the-morning-show-true-story/

Is The Morning Show Based on a True Story?

The flagship series from Apple TV+ bears more than a passing resemblance to recent #MeToo scandals

https://time.com/5708304/the-morning-show-true-story

Jarstastic · 20/05/2023 18:17

AnnWithoutAnnie · 20/05/2023 17:45

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.

Show quote history

I've only learnt about this recently and am not an expert. However, I understand if what you are referring to is police not making a 16 year old return home, I think they would have to inform social services and there would have to be a Merlin report?

I just had a quick google. Have a look at the 16-18 year old section of this.
https://westmidlands.procedures.org.uk/pkplh/regional-safeguarding-guidance/sexually-active-children-and-young-people-including-under-age-sexual-activity#s714

And this is from the NSPCC website:
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) defines a child as everyone under 18 unless, "under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".
EnglandIn England a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached their 18th birthday. Child protection guidance points out that even if a child has reached 16 years of age and is:

living independently
in further education
a member of the armed forces
in hospital; or
in custody in the secure estate

they are still legally children and should be given the same protection and entitlements as any other child (Department for Education, 2018a).

TheGander · 20/05/2023 18:21

These threads always hint that Schofield has done something awful, but the posters just can’t quite say what “ it’s common knowledge” “ skeletons in the cupboard”. His actual crime seems to be being gay and having married a woman ( by far the only man ever to have done that) and now having a brother who has carried out paedophile acts. It’s weird how most of mumsnet is Right On central, but poor old Philip Schofield is always fair game for a public shaming. I don’t have any opinion on the guy, I don’t watch daytime TV but the Schofield hate baffles me.

KTSl1964 · 20/05/2023 18:22

Does this mean he won’t host dancing on ice with HW - they where a slimey double act and I’m glad he’s gone.

Namechange9625 · 20/05/2023 18:24

TheGander · 20/05/2023 18:21

These threads always hint that Schofield has done something awful, but the posters just can’t quite say what “ it’s common knowledge” “ skeletons in the cupboard”. His actual crime seems to be being gay and having married a woman ( by far the only man ever to have done that) and now having a brother who has carried out paedophile acts. It’s weird how most of mumsnet is Right On central, but poor old Philip Schofield is always fair game for a public shaming. I don’t have any opinion on the guy, I don’t watch daytime TV but the Schofield hate baffles me.

No one can say or the thread will vanish because it's legally all speculative at the moment.

Mary46 · 20/05/2023 18:24

Interesting.. sure Ruth and E dont like him. Amanda same. He comes across quite smug HW too. Hard believe they used to holiday together

TheGander · 20/05/2023 18:25

It just seems really unpleasant to be relentlessly speculating about someone.

honeyrider · 20/05/2023 18:26

KTSl1964 · 20/05/2023 18:22

Does this mean he won’t host dancing on ice with HW - they where a slimey double act and I’m glad he’s gone.

Stephen Mulhern is tipped to take over hosting it.

Charlize43 · 20/05/2023 18:29

Oh is that what's going on as I overheard some people on the bus this afternoon say that he'd done a runner.

eddiemairswife · 20/05/2023 18:31

i saw him in Dr, Doolittle. He was very good. I don't watch the programme he is on.

STLLAP08 · 20/05/2023 18:32

He has skeletons if he has a super injunction on someone...will all come out I think
Bloke gives me the creeps

penniesmakeshillingsandshillingsmakepounds · 20/05/2023 18:33

If only he was taking Holly Dolly Dimwit along with him all would be good in the world.

IKnowItsNotMine · 20/05/2023 18:35

I suspect this is just the beginning

Newnamenewname109870 · 20/05/2023 18:37

TwilightSkies · 20/05/2023 15:15

He groomed a teenager! It’s common knowledge.

Is it though? I’ve never seen it anywhere apar t from mumsnet. Is someone from itv on here?

Why are they saying him and holly are fighting?

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 20/05/2023 18:37

How many lawyers do you think were employed to go through this article, before publication? A week after it went to print, Schofield has now left also mysteriously. Did they know he was going, or did he leave in response to it?

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12080825/Young-man-worked-Morning-close-Phillip-Schofield-left-ITV-mysteriously.html

SprinkleOfSunak · 20/05/2023 18:38

Yes, you’re absolutely correct, I think I worded that wrong - distracted by my children!

What I meant to ask is do super injunctions take place in a court, and does the person taking it out need to be present? If so, surely this would’ve earned press and media attention??? Or do they take place in a Solicitor’s office? I’ve never seen a report in which he’s been in court, other than for his Brother, so was wondering how the idea of him having took out the super injunction came about? Not that I track that man’s every move of course!

Underminer · 20/05/2023 18:39

I’d bet money on Scofe being in court himself within 3 years.

Hungrycaterpillarsmummy · 20/05/2023 18:39

discan · 20/05/2023 15:40

I think he was. His statement is quite clear that it wasn't all his own choice. ITV were not happy and he agreed to leave.

Show quote history

I agree. It screamed of "I've been pushed, so I'm going"

Somanycats · 20/05/2023 18:40

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'.

So did Mumsnet never allow us to say there was a super injunction about Ryan Giggs? They did many many times.

Connect3 · 20/05/2023 18:42

TheGander · 20/05/2023 18:21

These threads always hint that Schofield has done something awful, but the posters just can’t quite say what “ it’s common knowledge” “ skeletons in the cupboard”. His actual crime seems to be being gay and having married a woman ( by far the only man ever to have done that) and now having a brother who has carried out paedophile acts. It’s weird how most of mumsnet is Right On central, but poor old Philip Schofield is always fair game for a public shaming. I don’t have any opinion on the guy, I don’t watch daytime TV but the Schofield hate baffles me.

And an (ex)boyfriend approx 40 years his junior who he first met when the boy was 10yo and PS was patron of his theatre company. All of that is on the public record and neither deny the relationship. Boy was 15 when PS first followed him on Twitter and 18yo when he got a job on TM.

Hungrycaterpillarsmummy · 20/05/2023 18:43

Inkpotlover · 20/05/2023 18:13

I wonder if it's all been rushed through today because one of the Sunday papers has a big story on him they are running tomorrow. Stepping down with immediate effect is quite something.

His last show is Thursday so I really doubt anything will break this week about him

doitwithlove · 20/05/2023 18:44

Yayyyy 🎉🎉🎉🎉 my opinion is he should have been gone years ago.

marshmallowmatcha · 20/05/2023 18:45

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'.

Yes I was thinking it was more some other sort of arrangement.

Freefall212 · 20/05/2023 18:46

Newnamenewname109870 · 20/05/2023 18:37

Is it though? I’ve never seen it anywhere apar t from mumsnet. Is someone from itv on here?

Why are they saying him and holly are fighting?

Show quote history

If you google there are many pictures and first person accounts and posts on social media by the involved parties to corroborate the speculation. It is absolutely not just on Mumsnet. Some people on various sites did a lot of sleuthing.