Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

Join the discussion and meet other Mumsnetters on our free online chat forum.

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 39 40

Join the discussion and meet other Mumsnetters on our free online chat forum.

Chat

TV presenter allegations

1000 replies

JeandeServiette · 08/07/2023 23:54

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.

OP posts:

Thanks

Share

Report

Ktime · 09/07/2023 07:39

It’s obvious to me the BBC hadn’t spoken to this man between our complaint on May 19 and in June as they thought he was too important.

This is disgusting. The BBC will never learn, will it? No matter how much training and reform there is, they will always protect their paedophiles.

I’m glad I don’t pay a TV License fee, and still watch TV. Fuckers.

Thanks

Lacucuracha · 09/07/2023 07:41

Dita73 · 09/07/2023 04:50

What kind of mother who’s child is being exploited goes to The Sun rather than the police?

And of course, you look for a woman to blame.

She may have gone to the police, we don’t know yet.

And The Sun have been clear the mum asked for no money.

Have some respect.

Thanks

Mygazpachoistoocold · 09/07/2023 07:41

rwalker · 09/07/2023 06:49

Ironic that the sun report this when they were more than had to pay the likes of Sam fox and Kerry Latonia at 16 to get there tits out

it’s completely unsavoury but there’s very limited one sided info from a mother desperate to find someone to blame for there child’s drug problem

I was thinking about this. I just Googled Sam Fox and found this mind-blowing quote.

Her pictures ran underneath the headline ‘Sam, 16, Quits A-Levels for Ooh-Levels’.
Opening up about her debut in the paper, she said: “Part of me was feeling euphoria and wow my God, I’m on the front page of this huge newspaper.
“The part of me was thinking about going to school tomorrow and walking through those gates.”

Thanks

Dibbydoos · 09/07/2023 07:45

So it was reported to BBC in May and the presenter was still on TV in June cos they took no action until now they're not on TV and suspended with full pay? Congrats BBC. This is what TV licences fund...

And cos the person was 17yo, it's sexual exploitation. But how did they meet, when did they meet?

It's about time there were some names imprisoned for this type of behaviour. Let's hope the police get involved and they get prosecuted and go to prison.

Thanks

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 07:46

but how is this going to help the 20 year old who is addicted to crack?

Thanks

guinnessguzzler · 09/07/2023 07:46

Itsbeennice · 09/07/2023 07:19

Criminalising young people aged 16 for consensually engaging in sex would (IMO) lead to a tsunami of tangled, destroyed lives.
There is (also IMO) something exploitative about asking for sexualised photos, though, possessing one, or sending one.
I’m trying to work out why I feel this way. The law does seem odd, but sexualised photos on phones seem creepier (IMO) and more threatening than a fumbly sexual encounter between consenting 16 year olds.
Can someone make sense of this for me?!

Show quote history

Once you share a photo, it could end up anywhere, you have absolutely no control over what happens to it; whether it gets shared widely or even just looked at repeatedly by the person you sent it to, even many years later. It's a much bigger decision than consenting to a one off activity in that sense. Of course we can't police what people refer back to in their memory / fantasies but in general I think it makes sense to (try to) protect young people from this.

Thanks

Goldfoot · 09/07/2023 07:47

Have the police commented? They usually confirm or deny that a complaint has been made.

Thanks

Katypp · 09/07/2023 07:47

I am aghast at the way pps are ripping into the BBC on the basis of one unproven allegation by a family who seem to have now gone to ground.

Thanks

bellac11 · 09/07/2023 07:47

JeandeServiette · 09/07/2023 00:13

I mean, really, the identity of this scum bag isn't the most interesting thing.

Why it keeps happening in showbiz is the issue that needs attention but the again I keep thinking maybe the opportunities are better if you're a pervert who happens to have fans, and maybe it was ever thus. Maybe travelling minstrels and music hall stars also had a proportion of sleaze bags. The egos are big enough in entertainment industry for sexual offending to be a pattern.

I think this is a bit naive. Sex offenders and exploiters are everywhere, they are in supermarkets, in HR, retired, hospitals, its no more or less than any other industry, you only get to hear about it more because its a pubilc industry/public figures

YOu dont hear about Gary at the end of your road unless you know him or caught site of the one article in your local newspaper about his conviction and you certainly wouldnt hear about all the allegations about Gary that didnt result in any police action at all

Thanks

AuntieJoyce · 09/07/2023 07:50

Katypp · 09/07/2023 07:47

I am aghast at the way pps are ripping into the BBC on the basis of one unproven allegation by a family who seem to have now gone to ground.

They are ripping into themselves on the lead story on their app this morning

Thanks

Kinsters · 09/07/2023 07:50

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 07:46

but how is this going to help the 20 year old who is addicted to crack?

Probably it won't. But it will help whoever this person's next victim would have been.

Thanks

Lacucuracha · 09/07/2023 07:52

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 07:46

but how is this going to help the 20 year old who is addicted to crack?

You can’t understand why seeing your exploiter get justice could benefit the victim?

Thanks

AutumnCrow · 09/07/2023 07:53

Maybe the powerful groomers in TV Land can start funding treatment at the Priory or other clinics for their young victims?

We know that sexual exploitation correlates with substance abuse.

Thanks

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 07:53

no, this is for the parents
the addict is still an addict

Thanks

bellac11 · 09/07/2023 07:56

Has the young person themselves actually made the complaint or reported a crime to the police?

This will affect whether the police can act

And from experience, we hold lots of discussions with police about grooming/exploitation etc of the young people we work with (under 18s) and it usually ends NFA. Very very rarely is there an arrest or further action, Ive only known of one conviction in nearly 10 years and that was from sustained abuse.

Thanks

Lacucuracha · 09/07/2023 07:56

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 07:53

no, this is for the parents
the addict is still an addict

Why is it just for the parents? Do young people have no agency?

Thanks

toomuchlaundry · 09/07/2023 07:59

I wonder how many malicious accusations the BBC get. If the parent had proof they should have gone to the police

Thanks

mids2019 · 09/07/2023 07:59

Is there a danger that not announcing the presenter will ramp up homophobia? It would appear as are talking about a male presenter and a male victim so speculation will possibly fall on those presenters that are known to be homosexual (of course they may not)?

I think this case is worse than PhIl Schofield and when revealed a career is going to be swiftly ended.

Thanks

sashh · 09/07/2023 08:00

Itsbeennice · 09/07/2023 07:19

Criminalising young people aged 16 for consensually engaging in sex would (IMO) lead to a tsunami of tangled, destroyed lives.
There is (also IMO) something exploitative about asking for sexualised photos, though, possessing one, or sending one.
I’m trying to work out why I feel this way. The law does seem odd, but sexualised photos on phones seem creepier (IMO) and more threatening than a fumbly sexual encounter between consenting 16 year olds.
Can someone make sense of this for me?!

Show quote history

I think it is that sex between two 16 year olds is a private matter. Pictures can and are copied and forwarded and can follow you for the rest of your life.

I do think there should be some sort of 'Romeo and Juliet' clause in UK law. At least under the age of 18.

Thanks

gogomoto · 09/07/2023 08:01

If an offence has been committed then why hadn't the family reported it? Why go to the employer or a newspaper neither have the ability to investigate crimes. If it's simply seedy but not illegal behaviour then it's all about money I'm guessing, how much did the sun pay?

Thanks

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 08:01

it does sound seedy and there is plenty of seediness in all walks of life

Thanks

AutumnCrow · 09/07/2023 08:02

gogomoto · 09/07/2023 08:01

If an offence has been committed then why hadn't the family reported it? Why go to the employer or a newspaper neither have the ability to investigate crimes. If it's simply seedy but not illegal behaviour then it's all about money I'm guessing, how much did the sun pay?

It would have been illegal; and £0 reportedly.

Thanks

Willmafrockfit · 09/07/2023 08:02

sounds like the bbc are waiting for information from the addict, and none is forthcoming.

Thanks

gogomoto · 09/07/2023 08:02

It all sounds pretty close to blackmail to me.

Thanks

NotOnYourNellies · 09/07/2023 08:03

Christ, first I've heard of this
What on earth is it coming to?

Thanks

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 39 40

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.