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?

Whether the texts can be acted on by the BBC is an interesting question. The texts were exchanged privately between two people who had met on a dating site. If you have a text argument with someone and then that person posts it online could that be considered as bringing your employer into disrepute? That feels unlikely because there was a reasonable expectation of privacy.

I think if he posted the same things publicly on social media or in a group chat it would be easier to make the argument of bringing them into disrepute but in the case of personal correspondence between him and one other person I think he would argue the BBC were infringing on his right to a private life.

I wonder if there is a legal precedent on this.

Can you link to an article where the parents refer to the child as a she? Or, as a he?

The person in question has made a complaint to the BBC.

Whether the texts were private is irrelevant.

The person has said that a BBC presenter in a position of power has sent threatening texts.

The BBC themselves have made this public. It is bringing the employer into disrepute by acting in a way that is unacceptable - whether it is private or public is irrelevant if a complaint has been made.

So how in reality does a resignation happen without some statement about conduct? I think it would be bizarre to have a bland resignation statement without any mention of the investigation and I think ultimately that may look like an easy path for the BBC. Perhaps a sacking or ending of contract would look more forceful?

Can you link to a report that mentions a super injunction please?

I imagine he is being advised to drop
under the radar hoping the first kid supports his story, making it hard to achieve prosecution - the second youngster can be bypassed by saying someone used his phone and praying to god no one else comes forward.

If the police can’t prosecute then what do the bbc have? Unsavoury sexual acts between ‘consenting’ adults - optics are screwed of course but it might be a slim chance he can escape this escalating tsunami with his reputation in tatters, but without a prosecution which would be infinitely worse.

The presenter is rich, well connected and entitled he will stop at nothing to protect himself. I can’t see a dignified exit - more of a Julian Assange.

@Nesbi good point.
If the allegation about photos is all rubbish (as the 20 year old now claims) and the other issue is about messages exchanged privately, then yeah, whatever we think about the morality of it, it's reasonable to assume that they remain private.

We only know that this second person to come out of the woodwork claims the messages were 'angry and threatening' - but we that can be a subjective view, we don't know whether they would legally meet the threshold of being a threat. Plus this is in the context of this person having first made their own threat, to reveal the identity of the person they'd been chatting to.

Very messy situation and difficult to see how it'll play out

Way too calm and sensible.

No, though there are undoubtedly high profile women who are only able to be gay in secret. Passing as either single or married to men in public.

I'm not sure about the sex of the young person either. I can't link articles but I remember the first thing I read was the Mum saying 'my son' after that presenters seemed to carefully refer to 'they' or 'the young person' I haven't seen anything to indicate the young person is female

But where does that photo actually come from, did the mother (assuming she took a photo of his screen) give it to The Sun and the right to publish it?

Or it wasn’t published in the paper, sorry, but where does it come from..?

It's not that the second young person 'claims' the messages were threatening. It's that the BBC reported that the BBC had seen and verified the 'abusive and expletive-filled' messages.

Victoria Derbyshire also referred to "the young man" on Newsnight last night.

It also takes it away from The Sun which some pp used as a reason to not believe anything much was happening

@RedToothBrush - presumably you would have to consider what might be considered reasonable in the circumstances though?

Knowing the nature of the threats would be useful. Do they refer to power or influence that comes with his position - like “I know people high up who will make your life a misery” type threats?

Or are they more like “if you put my name on social media I will fucking kill you” type threats - which you might understand as someone being very angry (or frightened) but don’t actually mean that that person is intending to kill you and don’t relate at all to their position.

I suspect you would be on trickier ground if you said the second threat was bringing your employer into disrepute, because words like that aren’t uncommon during an argument and he might be able to say that he was being held to an unreasonably high standard.

I don’t know, I could be completely wrong!

Not once have the parents referred to the sex of their child…

Sky News is reporting that a third young person has claimed the accused broke lockdown rules in Feb 21 to meet them at their place and paid cash for a 'semi-nude' photo.

The Sun are NOW reporting that:

The Sun has seen messages which suggest that — as well as visiting the 23-year-old’s home — the star sent cash, and asked for a picture. He was sent a semi-naked photograph.
The person, who the presenter met, told The Sun last night: “The BBC were briefing the nation on the rules — when their star who was part of the institution was quite happy to break them.”
The BBC and the presenter have been approached for comment. The Sun will be handing its evidence over to the BBC’s investigation.
In an interview, the youngster told how the star travelled across London to another county to meet them at their flat in February 2021.

Now, person one is currently 20 and was first contacted when 17.

Person two is apparently 20.

And this is talking about a 23 year old.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/23026639/bbc-presenter-sex-claims-broke-lockdown-laws-meet-stranger/

So it sounds like this is now a THIRD person. And THESE allegations if The Sun can prove them, really aren't compatible with his job with the BBC. Again, conduct.

I was amused to see the continually repeated claim that there's no scandal and it's simply THE SUN telling lies because that's all they do suddenly stop late afternoon.

Well I think his bunker had better be deep… the shit is just about to hit the fan.

The attempt to make this about lockdown is pathetic, but the increasing numbers are v bad.

Yeh that faded away…

Two in one day is ominous.

Yes that is my perception that the young person (original one and now a new one) are both male