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?

No one is aware of anything. There's just wild speculation everywhere. It's insane.

I absolutely think people need to be held accountable for illegal acts; and also understand that people can lose their jobs if they tarnish the reputation of their employer; but this person is under trial by media before the facts have been established, investigated and shared. There's been a small snippet of information from the parents, with no context and against the wishes of the supposed "victim".

At 20, I would've been absolutely outraged if my parents had done this to me - regardless of my personal circumstances. How will this help the "child"?

This whole debacle has made me truly hope I never end up in front of a jury. The general public are completely incompetent!

I think he's done it and now he's being blackmailed.
I can't say I have much sympathy tbh.
His poor family.

What facts are you basing that conclusion on?

Police have issued a new statement

There remains no police investigation at this time

Totally true.

And for anyone to kid themselves that The Sun genuinely cares about moral rights and wrongs and is a champion of the underdog is incredibly naive. All the rag wants is a titillating sensationalist story with a preferably sexual angle as it appeals to the mentality of its general demographic.

If the BBC presenter was funding a crack addict’s habit with no sexual strings attached, it would be a complete non story for The Sun because, despite their apparent outrage, they wouldn’t be interested in just another article about drugs. It’s the sordid slant that reels them in.

Of all the media outlets the parents could have chosen, to me The Sun was possibly the worst - unless the decision was deliberately calculating by them knowing the salacious titbit would be of interest.

I think the current age of the young person is really important.

These are allegedly the intimate details of their life being revealed by a third party.

Even if the third party is that persons parents, they are an adult now and have a right to privacy. The parent was placing the BBC in a difficult situation, just making notes of a phone call or receiving emails was putting sensitive data into the BBCs possession without the data subject’s permission.

I think the BBC would be very wary of
receiving that sort of information if it wasn’t coming from the young person themselves, and with clear permission from them as to what the BBC could do with that data and who they could share it with. we know however that they absolutely didn’t want the BBC to have this information.

How is that headline 'giving Auntie a kicking'? It's an entirely factual description of pay for the top presenters?

This is very telling.

It's just the scum paper doing what they do.

And for anyone to kid themselves that The Sun genuinely cares about moral rights and wrongs and is a champion of the underdog is incredibly naive. All the rag wants is a titillating sensationalist story with a preferably sexual angle as it appeals to the mentality of its general demographic.

no one thinks the Sun cares about right and wrong or championing the underdog. That doesn't make the story untrue, nor ok.

It’s not what you say, it’s the way that you say it.

The young person's statement said nothing illegal or inappropriate happened, it didn't say "I've never had any contact with this person and I don't know why my batshit parents have fabricated the whole thing"

So I'm assuming there is an element of truth.

It said it was rubbish. That’s pretty unequivocal.

Do you have a link Efacsen, please? I can't see it on the BBC website.

Oh, sorry. Just found it.

"We have asked the BBC to pause its own investigation while we continue our assessment to establish whether there is evidence of a criminal offence being committed.
"The assessment is being led by detectives from the Met's Specialist Crime Command and follows a virtual meeting with representatives from the BBC on the morning of Monday, 10 July.
"There remains no police investigation at this time."

I agree with @WeWereInParis . It said nothing illegal or inappropriate happened which suggests something did happen

It also said it was rubbish. 🤷‍♀️

Just read a poster said only fans have a policy of performers being above 18, in that case, presenter did nothing illegal. How was he supposed to know the performer is 17 not 18 yet.

Of course it is morally wrong but he did nothing warranting this outrage on twitter. Nice ploy by the right wing paper to divert attention from whatsapp messages of the most moral political leader of our times, Mr. Boris Johnson

But even if it happened, at the worst it is morally wrong, presenter didn't know the age was 17 if website claims its performers are above 18. Looks like it was to distract from Boris and George, who are as usual getting away.

@Caramelatt no one knows if OF is involved , just speculation.

I would believe that this person involved didn't know the teenager wasn't 18 at the time they were only 17 snd bought those pics.
Not condoning their actions, but if I went onto a site that stated ' adults only , over 18' I would assume that everyone was , however naive that sounds ( plus I've never been on these sites , so haven't a clue how it works)
I didn't even go into pubs or clubs under age in the days when people could get away with that, but I knew plenty who did or had fake ID.
Apparently that is easy to get too if you know the right people and have spare money

Has the young person's statement caused more confusion? If they truly wanted the shut this down following on from 'it is rubbish' they could have said 'I don't know X, I have not met him or had any contact with him, and he has never paid me for sex photos' . Instead they chose to say 'nothing illegal or inappropriate happened' I just find this odd.

They've also potentially opened a door for him to make a huge amount of money. If he is outed or outs himself, he can certainly sell his story. And buy abundant crack with the proceeds. At best, what the parents have done is desperately unwise. Possible emphasis on the desperate.

The letter was written by Child and Child on behalf of their client. I imagine as a top flight firm of lawyers they know what they’re doing. I can’t see what part of “ the allegation is rubbish” could possibly be confusing personally.

@Soothingaftersun I agree, if they really wanted to stamp this out and if it really is rubbish then they could have added more to confirm. So maybe something did happen but it wasn't illegal and while it may be unsavoury, as a pp said , we can't stop people from doing legal stuff on the grounds of morality.

There appears to be another allegation from another young person