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?

I would have had more respect had the presenter done a Max Mosley/George Michael, been wholeheartedly unapologetic for having a sex life and refused to be publicly shamed.
Because it really has fuck all to do with us what someone does in their home as long as there is enthusiastic consent on both sides.

Expensive lawyers is never a good look.
Sadly, given the alleged age/alleged addiction issues, this makes it harder to prove there isn't an unequal power dynamic at play.

It is interesting that Phil had to resign but this person is protected for now.

However, the timing of all this - look over there! - is murky to say the least.
Bojo's PMs, that pre-wedding email referring to toxic behaviours, the ongoing criticism of the Beeb.

All that said, I resent paying my TV licence (especially just how much the big hitters are being paid) so if all this leads to it going, that's a result.

Cmon. Now, he should have been suspended immediately and a full investigation launched, and the bbc have said they tried to call and no one answered, so no one can prove as they didn’t leave a message. Hardly an investigation is it, and the guy stayed on air, and they still are protecting his identity. If that’s not a cover up what the hell is.

I like him to but this is very much a Frank bough moment( but social media wasn't a thing in the 80,s so.he was able to make a comeback.of sorts ) regardless of the outcome people won't forget what's Been said weather it's true or not .

This

also it has conveniently taken the heat of GO hasn’t it

Trial by social media again in this thread - no evidence of a cover. The mother had an expectation which wasn't met so went to the Sun. It's all about money. The law firm may have offered to represent the young man because this is so high profile. I think it's appalling that because someone has a job in the public eye they are treated as public property by large parts of the media and the public.

We don't know that the presenter wasn't being blackmailed. We don't know that it's even them involved. It could be fraud. There is no cover up.

I think if the young person sticks to his story, the parents and The Sun are in the shit

that’s not feasible. The parents have evidence. And they clearly are not letting go. So all they need to do is make it public. It’s simply no longer possible, no matter how much the kid protests.

I would imagine they have done so...

I read earlier that the stepfather said he had previously been to the police and was told no crime has been committed?! So wtf?!

From SkyNews: "I told the BBC I had gone to the police in desperation but they couldn't do anything as they said it wasn't illegal. They knew all of this."

The law firm may have offered to represent the young man because this is so high profile

and how would they know who they were and their contact details?

Tbf,Philip schofield,was protected for a,while with the whole coming out as gay on this morning.

How could they suspend on the basis of vague allegations that no-one would back up? That would be dreadful employment practice.

If he hasn't done anything wrong and allegations are unproven, why should he be outed?

We don't know what has happened, maybe the 20yo was blackmailing him for money? all speculation, let the internal investigation happen, publish the report if the presenter has acted illegally or taken advantage of his position.

This seems to me like the SUN has a downer on the BBC, rather than the BBC has done anything wrong.

But we don’t know what form the complaint took? A phone call, an email, a letter? How much information did the complainer give? And then nothing more when the BBC tried to make contact and get more information? Which makes it seem suspicious. It’s a bit flimsy to suspend someone on that pretext, employees have rights as well.

This kind of story always would be reported - its only the privacy laws that have stopped the sun posting name and pics.

Things don't have to be illegal to be wrong, a much older married man paying a young person for porn (maybe more) is grim as fuck.

It is the "unwise but not illegal" camp.

I'm fed up of us excusing men's dodgy behaviour. In some ways it was easier before as it would all be done and dusted now. The BBC are in a very difficult position as I can't see a way they can have the presenter back.

According to the parents statement there was nothing vague about it.

Not sure. Just saw the parents have come back again

You really can't imagine?

I suspect another newspaper is involved.

Suspension is not supposed to.be a punishment kits supposed to be neutral whilst an investigation takes place ,to.establish if anything untoward has occurred .

Other people are still being named. Like they can't believe the one is the right person, or they just don't want to believe it. Meanwhile other male presenters, including those not even on BBC are being accused. If I were another presenter I would release my own denial like Nicky Campbell and Rylan. I would look after my own interests rather than let the BBC do it. His activities have placed enormous stress on other innocent people. Plus his own colleagues must be finding it hard not to slip up on air.

There have been reports that the accused is well in with BBC management. Plus he is the senior voice at BBC news now. They really won't want him to go.

His position is untenable. The most honourable thing would be to name himself. Even if he thinks he has not done anything illegal or foolhardy, just present the facts and take it from there.

You’re definitely reaching now. The father says they provided a huge amount of info including the fact they’d been to the police. Way back in may, nothing happened, the money kept coming, and they are objecting to the fact the bbc says they tried to contact them, the bbc simply said they tried to call one time and no one answered. Hardly dealing with a major issue is it.

Exactly... "according to the parents"

when their kids are involved, parents can and do very strange things, especially if the SUN is paying them, the SUN seems to have changed its original story somewhat too.

I have so many questions- when did the alleged victim become estranged from their mother? How did the mother get hold of the bank statements and how did she know about the 'frantic' phone call asking for her to stop?

Presented is retired
Chairman resigns but he will be fine he has friends in high places

Everyone moves on

The sun hasn’t paid them, they have been very clear as have the parents they have received no money, they just want the man to stop giving their kid money so they can deal with the drugs issue

I totally agree. I imagine the parents sold the story, which was not theirs to sell or tell. Imagine doing that to your child…… who you are apparently so concerned about.