BBC Presenter and yet more allegations

[friendlycat]

It would appear that the front page of tomorrow’s The Sun has further allegations about messages with a new 17 year old. Creepy hearts etc

Scrolling through Sky news and seeing front pages of the papers. This appears bottom right on The Sun front page.

for Gods sake. Yes, let’s all blame the mother in this. You bunch of bloody judgemental handmaidens.

The 17 year old is now an adult and has very clearly stated he is not a victim and he does not want this attention. Yet the media feeding frenzy is intent on intruding into his privacy and removing his autonomy.

So many on here don't understand grooming.

My DD got targeted by a grooming gang when she was 15. She didn't consider herself a victim of abuse either.

I can totally understand the parents going to the press when they didn't get a response from the BBC. I've stood outside my child's school videoing the predators targeting my child - I've screamed at them in the street and told everyone who they were. I've threatened them, I've even stalked them. I made their lives extremely difficult for a long time. It takes over your life. The police were fucking useless!

It's the hardest thing in the world trying to protect your child when they're naively complicit in their own abuse.

For all those saying 'no big deal' I can guarantee you'd feel differently if it was a high profile man supplying your child with an obscene amount of money to sniff in exchange for sexual photos.

Calling a 17 year old child a 'crackhead' is just vile - bunch of apologists....on a fucking parenting site

Yy I forgot to add the distraction technique of:
blaming the mum

And now we can add to the list of ways they are trying to blame the first young person by focusing on their addiction. No victim is ever perfect enough for them.

I'm not sure they're handmaidens though. There's a lot of MRAs on here. Women tend to have a much better grasp of safeguarding and parenting than what the apologists are displaying.

This

It’s because it’s a BBC presenter. You’re right though

And if they'd done more investigation you'd have said they were sitting on it. One of the characteristics of conspiracy theories - any possible events are seen as supporting it.

The same name has been all over Twitter for days. I didn't even have to go looking for it. I've not speculated nor commented; frankly, I couldn't care less who this individual is, but unfortunately, there are very few names I could hear and actually be surprised.

Vigilante 'justice' is not how we do things in the UK and I'm not contributing to it. But the whole story raises some important issues.

It should be for the police to investigate the issue and the CPS to decide if there's enough evidence to charge this person, and to bring the case prosecution.

We've seen of late just how much faith women and abuse victims have in the police - the names of various forces in particular come up in this discussion - and their scepticism is not baseless. Victims have no reason to trust the police.

Various media outlets are beating various political drums, but none seem willing to admit this is an across-the-board establishment problem.

Society, in general, prefers to believe that women/children/victims are liars then men perpetrators of grooming and sexual abuse.

We're left with a distinctly unappealing Morton's Fork choice. Either we lambast the media, point out the undesirability of vigilantism to which no civilized society can aspire, slate those engaging in 'witch hunts', and let the situation carry on as it is: men acting with impunity in the safe and secure knowledge that the book will never be thrown at them for their actions. More innocent victims will suffer.

Or we can continue to throw sunlight on the issue, rely on the highly dubious concept of 'media justice', consider it merely unfortunate collateral damage if innocent men are implicated (it's happened in admittedly rare cases), and wonder how on earth we'd feel were our own son wrongly accused in an environment of men being at risk from allegations of inappropriate or illegal sexual conduct.

Continuing to rugsweep this insidious social sickness is, IMO, not an option.

Society, in general, prefers to believe that women/children/victims are liars then men perpetrators of grooming and sexual abuse.

100%

I am so sorry @lemmein for what happened to you. You have explained perfectly to the hard of thinking on here why this is such an incredibly complex situation.

Of which I have bitter personal experience, and on more than one occasion.

I don't doubt that many other women could tell the same story.

I’m frankly bemused by some comments on here. The idea that parents can waive some magic wand and their kid would be off drugs. There aren’t drug rehab services available even if the child (yes still their child even when over 18) would agree to go. Of course the parents would try to stop the source of money. The police didn’t act, the BBC didn’t act so they went the kind of paper that would publish this type of story to make the money stop coming.
To the poster who said what if they had the money from an employer? IMHE drug addicts aren’t good at holding down jobs let alone ones that pay well.

A 4th person has now come forward. (Sky news)

It's game over. All you apologists can crawl back under your rocks.

Who? Can you actually quote an ‘apologist’ post?

A whiff of homophobia

I think PS was saved by fear of homophobia, the child was ELEVEN when they first met in a power imbalance situation.

I am so sorry and I know that many other women can tell the same story.

Yes

I think the strawmen are gathering beside the pitchforks but not too close to the burning stakes.

As long as they all dig their heels in, including the presenter, the more scrutiny there is going to be of grooming and online predatory behaviour. In a way, whilst trying to defend this, they're simply drawing even more attention to it. The BBC and ITV are going to end up with much better reporting procedures. The government taskforce that monitors online interactions is probably going to extend its scope and the Online Safety Bill may have some amendments tabled to protect young people from exactly this type of behaviour.

So because someone doesn’t want to pursue a case (for whatever reason, whether it’s wanting privacy or still being dependant on the presenter for money etc) it’s totally fine to have allegedly paid for indecent images of children?

No wonder there are so many perverts around, when there are so many apologists ready to defend them too.

I truly hope that this thread has been infiltrated by MRAs like a previous poster suggested. They do tend to target these type of discussions...normally going on 'trigger warning' threads desperately trying to convince women the abuse they've described is no big deal.

I truly hope that's what is happening here. MRAs being apologist arseholes I can deal with, but women/mothers? Depressing.

For days now on numerous threads there has been all sorts of excuses made. On a parenting site some posters have been determined to victim blame and refuse to acknowledge predatory behaviour/grooming.

No wonder the rape conviction rate is so appalling.

He's also not been on his usual programme all week, with no explanation

From the first page alone:

Does the person in question have severe depression? Possibly even bipolar depression? Because it does result in risktaking behaviours, impulsive decisions with little thought for the consequences. Was wondering if he was reluctant to go public with that info as BPD is seen as a mental health disorder.

The alleged person has spoken openly about suffering severe depression over the last 20 years

Does this person deserve to have their life ruined? If it is who we think it is, it's been documented that they've had severe depression in the past. I should think after this they'll be a suicide risk. That would be awful.

So fucking what he sent some emojis to someone.

(Those are 4 posts from 4 people)

Agree @Lacucuracha

I don't know why people are making excuses for him.

The BBC and ITV are going to end up with much better reporting procedures.

The BBC has Saville to learn from and it is clear they haven't. So they won't learn from a few pictures.

How many hundreds of people kept quiet over Saville? People that knew but kusy closed ranks, or didn't want to risk their career as some people are seen to be untouchable.

Look at the PS, coming out farce, they all knew on This Morning why he was coming out and yet all turned a blind eye. The level of corruption and covering up is astonishing.

The most amazing thing is that some fall through the cracks, the real stories are kept from us.