There are many complexities of this situation, firstly that the parents approached The Sun newspaper and presented them with whatever their evidence is.
Secondly, that it relates to a senior TV Presenter employed by the BBC a public funded corporation. With added complications of historical mishandling of situations with other employees.
Thirdly, that said employee has a role within the BBC where gravitas and a high level of professionalism is a requirement of the job. Due to the nature of his role he is open to a level of scrutiny (fairly or not) that others say presenting "Homes Under the Hammer" or "Saturday Kitchen" would not have levied on them. (Accepting though that 'lesser' presenters still have a duty of how they conduct themselves when employed by the BBC.)
Lastly, he may not actually have done anything actually illegal. But many find his behaviour extremely sleazy and sordid and unbefitting of his status. Trawling whatever sites he uses to make contact with youngsters forty years plus his junior and requesting and sharing sexual images is at best extremely seedy.
The fact that whatever evidence was presented to The Sun in the first place then set off this roller coaster ride.
I feel sorry for his family, and also his colleagues having to front all of this.
He made choices of his own activities. He could have made other choices such as recognising his sexuality (which in this day and age would have been fine), ending his marriage and perhaps looking for a different relationship of equals rather than trawling for much younger assumed men on the internet.
If he was a Pop Star I wouldn't "judge" as much as it would be my choice whether I actively purchase their music in whatever format. But I have no choice of paying for the BBC Licence fee. I would like people who have senior positions within that corporation to behave in an appropriate manner, call me old fashioned.