How does the BBC get out of the presenter mess?

[mids2019]

Seriously how does the BBC now go forward and what can be the conclusion to this story? The story could run for some time with on going speculation about the presenter and eventually in my opinion a name will drop.

Can there therefore be any sort of fair investigation because I think there may be too much aspirational damage now for a career to be as ed. It seems the knives the BBC sit on this the more scrutiny there is and they desperately need a conclusion?

When? And if they did and were told there was no/insufficient evidence to bring charges why persist by going to the BBC and then The Sun when they still didn’t get what they wanted? There’s something distinctly fishy going on.

No, young men are choking women and normalising violent pornified sex. Things haven't improved at all.

Every groomed young person claims nothing wrong happened, this person is their friend, they helped them with lovely gifts, it was all consensual etc etc. They also lie to protect their "friend". That's what grooming is.

If the young person is saying nothing happened, they might be right, but it certainly isn't evidence that nothing happened.

People say he, where does this originate, is it a known thing that it’s a male?

Yeah, approaching a paper with your gossip about your child's sexual relationship isn't a great way to repair a strained relationship or help an addiction.

I can see how they might think they're getting justice, but I'd also be pretty furious if my parents persisted after I'd tried to tell them to stop

Timing not clear, but apparently sometime earlier this year. The police said there was no case to answer.

I increasingly believe this massively ramped up by those who want to defund the BBC. I don't think they have actually done anything wrong here.

The lawyers' letter mentions 'his mother' in reference to the young person, for example.

Thank you, that seems a reasonable assumption.

I still find it difficult to believe that a newspaper would print this extraordinary story without concrete evidence.

In which case that should have been the end of it.

I assume because whatever happened - although likely morally wrong - may not be illegal. Therefore nothing to report that the police will get involved with.

According to the step-dad (after the child denied the allegations yesterday) claimed they did go to the police but were told nothing illegal had happened. Conveniently missed that part out of the story at the beginning.

Meh, British public are all pots & kettles🤷🏼‍♀️. Kids are now being brought up to only value the representation of themselves on a screen (& to capitalise as best they can with it financially). Just look at the number of registered users of only fans - what % of the population is that?! Ye, it’s sleazy but not sadly out of the norm for our sick society.

Oh right thanks

TBF the police told my friend there was no case to answer when the parking firm she left her car with added 600 miles to the clock while she was away (because she voluntarily handed over her keys to the firm) so I'm not sure I have much faith in the police opinion on what constitutes a crime.

It doesn't have to be a police matter to be a disciplinary matter at work. The BBC code of conduct will absolutely include behaviour outside of work bringing the organisation into disrepute.

Also, police seem to be interested again now. Just because they took no interest in allegations about a well known, influential person doesn't mean there was no wrong doing.....we've been there before.

Maybe the truth of it whilst a bit seedy isn't as bad as it looks. Maybe the truth is

to be clear this is total fantastical speculation but an example of how it might not be as bad as it looks

The Young Person (YP) had an Only Fans account which the Presenter subscribed to.

Mother walks in on YP & and sees Presenter on screen. Mother goes mental. YP who doesn't want to admit they are making money off OFans lies to their mother. In the nature of all big lies, one lie leads to another and before you know it, a £35k generated from many people off Only Fans becomes this Presenter is basically grooming me.

Mother genuinely believes it. Complains to BBC

BBC approaches Presenter. Presenter says yes only fans, private matter, totally consensual nothing to do with you. BBC is like well maybe nothing doing here but fails to properly communicate with Mother

Mother angry about lack of BBC progress/takes complaint to Sun.

Whole thing goes public.

Presenter contacts YP and says 'WTH?'

YP tells presenter "yes I know. my mum has gone off her rocker. what can I do now too late'.

Presenter says ' you need to tell the sun and BBC that this was all consensual and you are on Only Fans (or whatever) but now it probably should be done formally and you probably need legal advice as you could get an injunction to keep your name out of it'.

YP says what should I do?

Presenter: you need a good firm of media lawyers. have a google or what aboutt the ones that Prince Harry was using.

YP: I can't pay for that

Presenter: don't worry, next time we do an Only fans I'll pay extra/ or I'll cover it.

Indeed. I just read 'No Comment' by jess Mcdonald who joined the Met and then left a few years later utterly disillusioned and having lost all her faith in how the police operate. It's a shocking read. I would not trust the Met to make a decent decision on this.

Yep - who else this week has been accused of having sex with a sixteen year old “so drunk they can’t stand”, in a pub toilet? Oh yes, a fellow newspaper editor and mate of Rupert Murdoch, who has just had his wedding disrupted. Lucky this story came out to deflect attention from that.

No one official has said anything at all about Onlyfans. It's bizarre how everyone is assuming it has anything to do with OF.

I suspect the lawyer approached the YA via an intermediary, may even be on some sort of contingency type arrangement or funded by a third party on a speculative basis.

Some reports appear to suggest that the parents claimed or implied the presenter “was funding” the drug habit.

I might be wrong, but unless the presenter was sending the money directly to a dealer/supplier in exchange for ‘services’, I’m not sure anyone can confidently state that fact. Surely, how the recipient of the money spends it once it’s in their hands is nothing to do with the sender?

absolutely. The posters here that are wondering why the these parents are thinking of their 20 year old as a child that needs protecting, and questioning how they have got bank statements etc: I think you probably have very little knowledge of addiction in a young person. It’s all completely feasible that this is true and the young person involved cannot see it from their parents’ point of view at all. Alternatively they could be being coerced.

Obviously it might actually be a blackmail plot of some sort but it’s a bit messy if so!

I suppose the parents could argue the presenter's morality deserved to be called into question because they're a public figure, but it's such a flimsy argument and I think it's more likely they went to The Sun for ££££. The presenter might be a sleaze for watching people pose online but do they deserve to lose their job over it? And if they are sacked or forced to resign, what about the millions of other OF subscribers who might also hold down 'responsible' jobs like doctors, teachers and police officers?

Can someone private message me with who this is please. I’m obviously not the 1 in 6 who know.