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.

Redtoothbrush, sorry but this ‘don’t do something if you don’t want the world to know’ is bullshit. Note you are on an anonymous website posting all this, why? How would you feel if your account was exposed and the ‘stronger’ of your posts on here were revealed for everyone to see, especially ones where you may be discussing somebody you know? Would you be fine with it? Have you ever had a threesome, or had sex outdoors (where nobody can see)? Would you be fine with your parents seeing a long lens photo, and think ‘oh well I brought that on myself’? Do you want your DP/DH to know you’ve occasionally looked up an ex on Facebook even if you never messaged them? Don’t want to get caught then don’t do it, right?

This morality policing will not stop at paying somebody uncomfortably young but legal for nudes. It won’t. The line will just edge further and further towards you until privacy is a thing of the past and your peers feel entitled to publicly shame you over something you were within your rights to do but they found morally dubious.

I ascribe to a European model of press rather than the American witch hunting of present. I think any sniff of illegality and then it tips into public interest. But this is just salacious, especially given the young man in question (who is now 20) doesnt want anything to do with it. He’s probably sat at home panicking about being doorstepped and exposed when he should just be getting on with his life.

In your quest for ‘justice’ and to get revenge on sleazy men you’re actually having the reverse effect.

Yep checks and balances.

Our press is flawed. But alternative solutions are not necessarily better.

A man who earns over £400k should be able to afford adequate legal and publicity support (unless he's 'blown it all on coke and hookers'*)

The Cliff Richard Case was shameful but also demonstrated there was a recourse for someone in the public eye - they had the means to bring a legal case and get a ruling in their favour.

*Alternative more modern and inclusive variations on this theme are available.

As for Markle, well... I think she's doing well enough out of the lawyering and PR.

Jesus Christ, yes I'm sure she's really grateful for what she's endured at the hands of the press.

*So, according to some, “no crime has been committed”.

So, everyone who thinks this is ok with their vulnerable 17 year olds being paid to exploit their bodies for an old guys sexual pleasure.*

It hasn't been shown that this is the case though - the alleged victim says not, the police had a look early on and said that nothing criminal was going on. You are taking the word of an estranged parent via the Sun, which is yet to produce any evidence or even describe the evidence they have seen.

So, everyone who thinks this is ok with their vulnerable 17 year olds being paid to exploit their bodies for an old guys sexual pleasure.

Calm down. The 17 year old in question says the claims are “rubbish”,

If people want to 'expose' me then let them!

My posting reflects what I would say in RL.

My private life affects no one cos I'm not a tosser.

Really that's not an argument that I think carries much weight.

I might actually bring a few fuckers down with me if I got exposed tbh!

You’ll have to inform Catherine Zeta Jones that she needs a divorce ASAP.

She was 28. That's a significant difference to being 18.

That does matter.

I think it carries huge weight. I think 90% of people have done something that would shock their family and friends if they knew.

Witch hunts that appear to tip into public interest are equally destructive. I dropped in a reminder of the Carl Beech case earlier in which several completely innocent lives were significantly damaged by a fantasist. Anyone who doubts that should read the victim statements. No amount of legal or PR support helped those men and no amount will help the BBC presenter. At the end of the day if he’s cleared he might be able to sue the arse off The Sun but his career and reputation are still ruined. Hopefully the identity of Young Person 1 will never be revealed, their life must be hellish right now. They never asked for this.

Seems the kind of story where we bring our own morality to it. Sure, if something is within the bounds of legality, fine. But we're not talking about some random Old Man Bloggs and his penchant for tender young flesh. When you factor in hypocrisy, it puts an entirely different slant upon it. If it is indeed the main suspect, a public figure cannot pretend to be a paragon of virtue but act otherwise. He is definitely finished. If he appeared on a TV screen again, the image I would have in my head is of a sleazy old git with his trousers round his ankles, polishing his knob.

@Sweetashunni Yes always thought that was grim too.

Via his very expensive lawyers….

She was 28. That's a significant difference to being 18.

Interesting - at what age would you deem someone capable of deciding who they want to be in a relationship with @RedToothBrush ?

Nope I can quite truthfully say I have never done anything anyone would be remotely shocked about. Some of us are genuinely have principles and standards you will be shocked to learn. We are not ‘at it’ in some form or another.

Interesting that the young person used the word ‘rubbish’ when referring to the claims. I wonder why they didn’t say ‘lies’ or untrue’?

Oh, ok. So someone who may have been groomed at 17, and may well still be under the control of this presenter (legal fees paid etc) is saying it’s rubbish.

Let’s all assume there’s nothing to the story. No need for anyone to investigate, the child who was allegedly paid for explicit photos and or videos says nothing happened. Phew

I am not sure any seventeen - twenty year old I know would even use the term ‘rubbish’ it is a very old fashioned word I haven’t even heard in decades. It’s worrying that even the language sounds off.

Let’s all assume there’s nothing to the story. No need for anyone to investigate, the child who was allegedly paid for explicit photos and or videos says nothing happened. Phew

We don't have to assume - the stepfather said he went to the police and they said there was nothing criminal to investigate.

A pp said this but I'll repeat - a 17 year old rubbishing claims who then has very expensive lawyers releasing statements rubbishing it - you can't say they are NOT a victim (you can say it, but it's not necessarily true)

When people are being exploited they often don't see the abuser as being abusive at the time. Posters have said on the threads - they wouldn't have said anything wrong happened either had they been asked at the time when it happened to them. You don't see them at first as exploiting you, you think your situation is totally different, you minimise (often)

Saying now - "all rubbish" especially when to say otherwise would be them admitting to making and selling those images (which IS a crime) might be what they believe now.

Many people change their minds in hindsight and come to the realisation sometimes years later that they were being exploited

If the 17 year old in 30 years time still thinks it did them no harm, cool beans. But a big fancy lawyer saying so doesn't make it so

If presenter is paying for the lawyer- even worse, totally creeped me out when Schofield said he was paying for lawyers like he was doing a favour to the runner. Presenter may not be paying for lawyers- they might be doing it pro bono ... but ask yourself why? To genuinely help a young person? Or to make themselves particularly attractive to the people who DO have the money to hire them? It's good business sense but a lawyer says rubbish on behalf of a 17 year old sending sexually explicit photos... well they're hardly gonna say yeah admit to a crime publicly are they?!

Perhaps not, but the point is are you arguing for a change in the law whereby a relationship can only be a few years difference between 2 people? (that would count my relationship out by the way)

If not, then apart from disapproving internally what are you suggesting should happen? - as the poster says, people being sacked from jobs if they have relationships with younger people? Being harrassed in the streets? Having to wear stickers or attend rehabilitation or therapy?

What is it that should be different?

The police said the same thing to me when my DDs groomers were sat outside her school in a car waiting for her. It's not illegal to park outside a school apparently....ok but I have voice messages which proved they were there to pick her up....still not illegal. The police inaction emboldened these people which had long term consequences for my DD.
One of them was older than me FFS.

The police said nothing illegal was happening in Rotherham for a very long time too - they even arrested the victims for being a nuisance 🙄

My 23 year old boyfriend uses the terms "rubbish" and "bin bags". Maybe it's come back into fashion.

his only comment on this debacle was that if all was legal, not much to say, but could the person get into legal trouble if they pretended to be 18 on certain websites?

A pp mentioned the mother is "estranged", is that correct? Well, I suppose no one knows anything for sure.

Nothing against Jeremy Vine himself but why do men in general always do the "My wife is very worried for my safety" as some kind of statement. Ive seen it used in millions of contexts, often used by men to get out of social commitments ("would love to come out for beers etc but my wife has not given me a pass" like they are 7 years old, when it is obvious to all and sundry they just dont want to go.
Here, "please don't be nasty to me, especially as my wife is now worried about me" (yes the same wife who, if the allegations were about me I would be cheating on with a 17 year old boy but anyway, its my wife who is worried don't you know).

A pp said this but I'll repeat - a 17 year old rubbishing claims who then has very expensive lawyers releasing statements rubbishing it - you can't say they are NOT a victim (you can say it, but it's not necessarily true)

You definitely can say there is no evidence of criminal activity (according to the police), and you can also say that the legal system here assumes innocence. (In spite of a PP's suspicions that a statement drafted by a lawyer uses a word that no 17-20 year old of their acquaintance would use 🤪)

Thank you!! I'm really sorry that happened to you and your daughter @lemmein

I look back on my own younger days very differently now. People also couldn't be prosecuted because what they were seen and known doing wasn't illegal - parking outside of social services offices and collecting me from my case review no less...

I thought I had a lovely older boyfriend (for a while) But I didnt. I was a vulnerable child being abused.

Every sign was there. He was never witnessed doing anything illegal though by those who had the entire picture and knew exactly what was happening to me. So nothing got done

Plus I was telling social workers how lovely my "older" boyfriend was to me. I certainly wouldn't have told police anything had they come asking