Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Schofield saga-to think this is all very odd?

325 replies

Howwindyisittoday · 28/05/2023 16:39

It’s very confusing.
Rumours have been circulating for three years, even I knew the rumours, how on earth did Holly and others not?
He says there was no injunction, so the boy could have spoken out at any time..so why is it all coming out now?? Why has Holly suddenly distanced herself, why have itv got rid of him now?
They've now said the boy was 15 when they met (sure was younger?) and nothing happened until he was older, nothing illegal but still massively wrong. But if there is nothing illegal and they all knew about it…why now?
Why has P.S been so willing to go along with it this week?

This feels like a cover up for something much much worse?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
OCarumba · 28/05/2023 23:20

AmbleInAnnBoleyn · 28/05/2023 23:17

What is a 'runner' in this context? (sorry to be a bit thick)

It’s a job in tele - I’m not fully sure what they do, I get the impression it’s general dogsbody

hihelenhi · 28/05/2023 23:23

A "runner" is a kind of, yeah, a general dogsbody, errand-runner, tea-bringer. A gopher, essentially (oh, the irony. Or perhaps not).

RedToothBrush · 28/05/2023 23:23

Yep a TV Runner is a TV Gopher.

GoOnHoliday · 28/05/2023 23:24

Did you notice as new articles came out they bingo went quiet here and the comments now on the news?

I am not on Tatle, I gather that's getting the same comments.

AmbleInAnnBoleyn · 28/05/2023 23:25

Ah ok, in my office days (a looooong time ago, not tele or meedja) we had very junior staff we called gophers (go for this, go for that) who ran urgent errands around the building (pre computer days, would have been looking for paper files for the fee-earners/nipping to the cafe across the road with a lunch platter order etc) Same kind of role. Thank you!

AmbleInAnnBoleyn · 28/05/2023 23:26

x post re gopher.

Hollow laugh at gopher, too, how about that eh.

GoOnHoliday · 28/05/2023 23:46

There is an odd thread now in Dr R, it seems fake, like lots of OTT positive posts and it has now taken a t urn as if it was set up to ruin his reputation with women in here.

Putin both sides tactics.

GoOnHoliday · 29/05/2023 00:07

That last Dr R post was not written by a woman.

Berlioze · 29/05/2023 00:19

Dita73 · 28/05/2023 21:44

There was never an injunction but the boy/man signed an NDA. However this expires in July and it’s thought that he will tell everything

If this is true, and that's a BIG if, two thoughts that come to mind are that:

  1. There would be a confidentiality clause in the NDA meaning the fact it even exists/ed would not be known; and
  2. If an NDA (any, in general, I'm not talking about this case) relates to issues that may, for example, constitute a criminal offence, then the contractual terms either would specifically waive the obligation of confidentiality in such circumstances or any such obligation would eventually be disapplied/considered invalid. There is also a guidance from the SRA published following the MeToo scandals which specifically prevents solicitors from advising in cases involving use of NDAs to cover up potentially criminal conduct and silence the victim. There could be serious conduct and regulatory issues for a solicitor who drafted this kind of an agreement.
BeatrixKidd · 29/05/2023 00:34

3dogsandarabbit · 28/05/2023 17:04

There may have been rumours but that's all they were rumours. The ITV bosses asked PS and the other man involved if the rumours were true and they both denied it. So they would have to accept those answers as without proof what can anyone do? The same with HW, some people can be very convincing when they lie.

That's an oversimplification. The fact the young man also worked on This Morning is the key factor here, since there's objective proof that he was given a unheard of level of special treatment for someone who's job was to fetch people's coffee.

He was frequently given onscreen appearances, permitted to do onscreen interviews with prestige talent, even did an onscreen appearance shirtless once (no one questioned why Phil's 18yr old special friend and assistant was being asked to get half-naked on live TV?? Who came up with the idea for the shirtless segment anyway?). He attended the NTAs twice sitting next to Phil, and even got to go up on stage to accept the award and was standing right behind Phil and Holly while they gave their acceptance speech. Even most of the crew don't get invited to awards ceremonies, just the stars, producers and execs. I've never, ever heard of a runner getting to go, not ever. And he didn't just get to attend, he was sitting next to Phil and onstage! He even got to go to the afterparty, something happened that resulted in him being kicked out (allegedly he and PS got into a fight in front of everyone) and he was papped accosting Holly outside. Which again is just insane, since runners usually aren't even really allowed to speak to the onscreen talent unless it's to ask their coffee order or something.

I've seen runners fired on the spot just for making a slightly sarcastic comment in response to a celeb being demanding. The fact he wasn't instantly fired and blacklisted for fighting with the onscreen talent at a major high profile event, getting kicked out of a major event, then accosting the other onscreen talent after getting kicked out, proves there was a relationship. There's simply no other explanation. There's just no way on earth a runner would be allowed to do any that unless they're related to or sleeping with someone very important.

The overt special treatment alone should have been enough to warrant action. Even if there hadn't been any rumours, This Morning should have been asking questions as to what the hell their barely out of his teens errand boy was doing on the NTA stage and getting kicked out of the celeb afterparty.

ChintzyGunslinger · 29/05/2023 00:50

Howwindyisittoday · 28/05/2023 17:38

His name has been out there for three years

Yes, like you, I have been aware of this for ages, and it's not like I have a finger on the pulse of tv gossip.

friendlycat · 29/05/2023 01:16

BeatrixKidd · 29/05/2023 00:34

That's an oversimplification. The fact the young man also worked on This Morning is the key factor here, since there's objective proof that he was given a unheard of level of special treatment for someone who's job was to fetch people's coffee.

He was frequently given onscreen appearances, permitted to do onscreen interviews with prestige talent, even did an onscreen appearance shirtless once (no one questioned why Phil's 18yr old special friend and assistant was being asked to get half-naked on live TV?? Who came up with the idea for the shirtless segment anyway?). He attended the NTAs twice sitting next to Phil, and even got to go up on stage to accept the award and was standing right behind Phil and Holly while they gave their acceptance speech. Even most of the crew don't get invited to awards ceremonies, just the stars, producers and execs. I've never, ever heard of a runner getting to go, not ever. And he didn't just get to attend, he was sitting next to Phil and onstage! He even got to go to the afterparty, something happened that resulted in him being kicked out (allegedly he and PS got into a fight in front of everyone) and he was papped accosting Holly outside. Which again is just insane, since runners usually aren't even really allowed to speak to the onscreen talent unless it's to ask their coffee order or something.

I've seen runners fired on the spot just for making a slightly sarcastic comment in response to a celeb being demanding. The fact he wasn't instantly fired and blacklisted for fighting with the onscreen talent at a major high profile event, getting kicked out of a major event, then accosting the other onscreen talent after getting kicked out, proves there was a relationship. There's simply no other explanation. There's just no way on earth a runner would be allowed to do any that unless they're related to or sleeping with someone very important.

The overt special treatment alone should have been enough to warrant action. Even if there hadn't been any rumours, This Morning should have been asking questions as to what the hell their barely out of his teens errand boy was doing on the NTA stage and getting kicked out of the celeb afterparty.

Show quote history

How very true indeed. You’ve summed it all up perfectly. It would have been so very apparent that something was very amiss in this instance. Under normal circumstances this situation would just not have happened.

newfriend05 · 29/05/2023 01:19

Of course she knew ... but what I'd like to know is , why has he made that statement now .. he has literally thrown himself under the bus .. just days after saying he left Mutual decision etc ... there has to be a reason for it

Ladybird69 · 29/05/2023 01:23

Isn’t he just as bad as his brother? Both like young boys in inappropriate ways. That’s probably why he kept his brothers sick secret because he knew that should his brothers vile behaviour come out then his own child grooming and relationship would come out too and he’d lose everything.

GoOnHoliday · 29/05/2023 01:27

Which again is just insane, since runners usually aren't even really allowed to speak to the onscreen talent unless it's to ask their coffee order or something.

Bloody hell, what a work environment, this is not normal. I have worked or volunteered in a few industries, no where has the lowest grade junior staff worker not been allowed to converse with, raise an eyebrow, say hello in passing to more senior staff.

I watched a video from Sonia Poultin describe Holly stand staring at the wall as a long term make-up artist passed her in the hall. You don't see that type of behaviour in any other workplace.

GoOnHoliday · 29/05/2023 01:35

That scene between the make-up artist and Holly seems like the Southwark world privacy tour.

I don't think fame is a good thing for people.

Dr R must be thinking if only I stayed a standard GP.

I also think looking at your own reflection on social media or TV can't be good for you either.

Greensheeps · 29/05/2023 01:58

Sorry not read the whole thread, but legitimately wondering why has Phil Scho got so much interest? Why does anyone care so much? How is this headline news?

ChintzyGunslinger · 29/05/2023 02:19

Because it is apparent he has groomed a teenager, if not a 10-12 year old boy. He has used his position of power to indulge this affair, lied about it to colleagues, and then silenced the now young man - all the while accepting accolades for being "brave" in coming out as gay while in a longterm marriage.

User154871 · 29/05/2023 02:46

There's clearly more to come.

There was clearly a power problem at ITV. PS had so much power that he chose his co-host (multiple stories about him hating anyone other than Holly and insisting they take holidays together so she couldn't be paired with anyone else in case they started seeing replacements for PS), power imbalance and grooming with the boy in question.

Sounds like anyone who dissented got managed out. No wonder Holly looked the other way to sustain her job - until the tide turned against PS; it was career suicide to do anything. Also she clearly didn't know a few years ago - rumours about her being very angry that PS knowingly allowed her kids and his brother to holiday together. Arguably watching Ruth get fired would have warned her to shut up.

That said her husband has some clout - god knows why they didn't leave TM a few years ago to avoid getting dragged into this.

dancinginthesky · 29/05/2023 06:03

It's total BS they investigated rumours- the kid was up on stage accepting an award with them. As if ITV management allowed a junior staff member to be there and didn't have a reason why

Then there's the frequency of their trips together to eat enough for Jack Jones to intentionally get that footage

They absolutely in my book knew at ITV and got rid of those who raised concerns

OCarumba · 29/05/2023 06:12

Berlioze · 29/05/2023 00:19

If this is true, and that's a BIG if, two thoughts that come to mind are that:

  1. There would be a confidentiality clause in the NDA meaning the fact it even exists/ed would not be known; and
  2. If an NDA (any, in general, I'm not talking about this case) relates to issues that may, for example, constitute a criminal offence, then the contractual terms either would specifically waive the obligation of confidentiality in such circumstances or any such obligation would eventually be disapplied/considered invalid. There is also a guidance from the SRA published following the MeToo scandals which specifically prevents solicitors from advising in cases involving use of NDAs to cover up potentially criminal conduct and silence the victim. There could be serious conduct and regulatory issues for a solicitor who drafted this kind of an agreement.
Show quote history

I don’t think there’s any suggestion at this point of criminal activity.

HairyKitty · 29/05/2023 06:20

This whole subject stinks of hypocrisy to me. Or gleefully sticking the knife in. Is it because he’s gay that people are so horrified and angry? It’s not because he’s married, married people have affairs all the time.

Why does anyone including ITV actually care if he had a relationship if it was legal? If you don’t like it why aren’t you campaigning to raise the age of consent then? I don’t think it’s ok for a 16yr old and an adult, but for some reason this is completely legal in the UK. So people should save the (fake) moral outrage at the gay public figure, and instead consider whether a legal age of consent of 16 years really works.

HairyKitty · 29/05/2023 06:22

I do t know what to say really. Are we all pearl clutching and pontificating because a public figure lied about an affair? What did you expect him to do then? What does everyone else do? Why should he be held to higher standards?

GoOnHoliday · 29/05/2023 06:31

HairyKitty · 29/05/2023 06:22

I do t know what to say really. Are we all pearl clutching and pontificating because a public figure lied about an affair? What did you expect him to do then? What does everyone else do? Why should he be held to higher standards?

pope GIF

You want it acceptable as normal what went on in TM?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UcEa0C7CyPw&pp=ygUOUGVhcmxjbHV0Y2hpbmc%3D

OCarumba · 29/05/2023 06:34

HairyKitty · 29/05/2023 06:20

This whole subject stinks of hypocrisy to me. Or gleefully sticking the knife in. Is it because he’s gay that people are so horrified and angry? It’s not because he’s married, married people have affairs all the time.

Why does anyone including ITV actually care if he had a relationship if it was legal? If you don’t like it why aren’t you campaigning to raise the age of consent then? I don’t think it’s ok for a 16yr old and an adult, but for some reason this is completely legal in the UK. So people should save the (fake) moral outrage at the gay public figure, and instead consider whether a legal age of consent of 16 years really works.

It’s nothing to do with him being gay, it’s the fact that he knew this person in his capacity as patron for a youth theatre group (I believe) from when he was a pre teen, and was a mentor who got him a job at this morning. There is a strong indication that grooming of a minor took place, and abuse of power most certainly took place. Apparently his power was such that people who raised queries got managed out.

This also comes at a time when he has admitted covering for a convicted paedophile - specifically, not telling police this person had abused a child.

Apparently ITV, his management company, HW, etc. also feel it is a big deal.

If it’s not of any interest to you why come here to talk about it? You’ve come here to defend him?