TV presenter allegations

[JeandeServiette]

Could we PLEASE have a thread that stays up?

Meaning don't name anyone, or any programme or ask for initials or hint.

I just would like to discuss how this is likely to unfold.

There’s so much we don’t know about the situation.

The teen didn’t contact the police and by the details provided by the mother (crack addict) it is clear they are vulnerable.

The presenter may have mental health problems, depression for example.

All of this could be so devastatingly damaging.

It’s WhatsApp.

The wedding ring and watch are his.

I suppose it depends on whether or not she sold the story to the Sun. She could make thousands.

It seems entirely possible to me that the ‘young person’ - a crack addict, and I have some experience of the lengths one will go to - has recently been blackmailing the ‘BBC personality’ and that this angle hadn’t occurred to the foolish mother when she went shooting her mouth off to the press.

Mental health problems do not excuse abhorrent behaviour.

If it was your child that needed safeguarding who would you report to first? a) Police b) employee, or c) The Sun

I've been wondering about blackmail too - it would explain the high figures.

I mean the article literally says she didn’t receive any payment.

It’s like people rush to social media without reading the source?

Yes I agree. We dont have any real detail at all so far. It's also possible the alleged victim has been blackmailing is it not ? Following some kind of foolish error - by the person who for the moment remains nameless.

Where did I say different to that?

I’m talking about the potential consequences of the situation.

Yes crossed my mind too. It may not be as straight forward as it appears or is being shaped.

The timing of this and the way it has been reported to purposely whip people into a frenzy to try and uncover the mystery stinks of a distraction technique. All the more convenient when Mr Osbourne got married after his 'poison email'

The whole scandal is dependent on (as I believe) one very important missing fact, how did the two meet?

Perhaps this piece of information has been left out to make the scandal much worse, because if the person was met in a bar or on OnlyFans the assumption would be that individual was an adult.

Too many people jumping to conclusion on such little information. I'm also sceptical of images due to DeepFake.

I'm keeping an open mind.

If anyone has hinted at or named the BBC star today, the BBC has this warning:

” Anyone speculating today on social media about the identity of the presenter should think very, very carefully about the consequences. They could be sued for the harm they cause and financially ruined.”

I can’t believe Mumsnet has let this thread stay up considering the amount of heavy hinting on here by PPs.

We’ll, probably not the police

Katie Hopkins was talking shit then, shock horror.

Absolutely this! The more I've thought about this story the more I've thought we are all being played! A right wing tabloid newspaper breaks the story regarding an organisation whom the current government wants to disrupt. Everyone goes into whodunnit mode and oh no not more yewtrees. However...why would this person not get an anonymous profile on a cam girl website or only fans whatever rather than seek out a random crack addict to pay them hundreds of thousands for dodgy photos.. They are presumably an intelligent individual with family and the risks are majorly high for exposure..it's not massively plausible is it? Nor is a mother thinking a right wing tabloid newspaper the Sun known for its abhorrent reporting of the Hillsborough disaster and wrongful slandering the dead Liverpudlian children and parents would be a great place to get justice for her addicted son.. not to mention the deep fake photos appearing.

Hmmmmmmmm! More will come to light on this, there is a reason this person hasn't been named already! Cliff Richard sued when everyone jumped on the bandwagon filming operation yew tree when his house was raided and he was later cleared as I recall. He was rightfully very upset at being tarred with that brush!

Police.

What did Katie Hopkins say?

I agree. None of it is adding up. Not that people whipping themselves and others into a frenzy will care about that, or the damage it will do.

Yes I totally agree. I mean it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the presenter thought the person was 18, in fact I'd say it was probable if anything. In which case yes it's sleazy but worlds apart from the way it's being presented by the media.

But they'd already been to the BBC. Nothing happened other than he allegedly received an award and was photographed with BBC bosses. I personally would have hoped that the BBC would have more clout/resources than the police. And there is the assumption here that she went to The Sun, rather than having been approached by an independent journalist who had found out about it. Someone once tracked me down as they wanted me to provide a story. In fact, I was approached by several journalists. I was told that they could run with parts of the story anyway as it was publicly available. I was persuaded that it would be preferable if I retained control of the story and that they represented me. They took the story/quotations/photographs and sold them off in 'exclusive' bundles to a middle man/agent who bid on them. Suddenly the story was published in the Daily Mail,The Sun and several other papers. I had no control over that. I didn't get paid. It wasn't a particularly newsworthy story. I'm not remotely famous. It was just a filler story. My motivation for cooperating was to raise awareness of an important issue, following a close brush with death. My point is that the press doesn't necessarily operate in a way that you think that it does. She may have chose to approach The Sun. She may have been approached. She might not have known who the journalist was working for or whether they were independent.
I unfortunately have a sister who is an addict. She is now terminally ill. She has come so close to dying several times. You live constantly on edge in a state of constant dread. You jump when the phone goes. As family members you become increasingly desperate. I just don't think it fair here for the Mum to be a target of criticism. The criticism should lie solely with the perpetrator and the BBC who failed to investigate adequately in a timely manner.

On The World Tonight George Parker pointed out that the story seemed to have changed by midday with the Culture Secretary saying that the BBC should be given space to investigate properly, suggesting that she'd been told that this was rather more complicated than the Sun's headlines.

I agree that there is something that doesn't add up.

There is nothing less attractive than a crack addict, so the idea that the person keeps being asked for photos by a famous person sounds really weird to me.

I'm assuming that the victim is saying that they weren't a crack addicts or taking drugs before they met this famous person, but that the pressure of what they were doing, led them to take the drugs.

However, it does depend how they met him. If they met on only fans, then they were revealing themselves to more than just this one person, so why is this person to blame for everything?

We don't know that BBC failed to investigate in timely manner. We only know that the Sun is saying that the mother said that BBC didn't stop the activity of their employee (which would be legal between 2 adults, anyway). We don't know exactly what the mother said to BBC, even. There is way too much incomplete information.

My mother lived with my brother addicts so I have a family experience that makes me puzzle about other aspects of story as told. Does the young person live in France or Canada? Did they misrepresent themselves to the buyer? Did they lie to their mother about their customer (shock, horror, addicts lie). Is the buyer someone else entirely, but pretending to be the BBC presenter ? Was there no payment or images sent before seller turned 18 anyway? Why would the presenter (with all their other opportunities to cheaply see other porn on Internet) have this long-term seedy relationship ? It's crazy. Whether a crime was committed depends on details.

Why would they be living in France or Canada?