BBC presenter allegations.

Absolutely. I question her motives. If it were your child wouldn’t you want to get it stopped with the minimum of publicity?

eddiecat78

I do find it concerning that the mother felt it was more appropriate to speak to The Sun rather than the police. It is claimed that she hasn't taken any payment but she must be very naive if she thinks her child's identity will be protected now she has involved the tabloid press

The BBC has known since May, so maybe she went to the papers to expose the fact that nothing was being investigated.

Louella12

I don't know if the police could do anything though. The boy was 17.

It appears that the man in question is now identified by many online. No doubt the name will be made public sooner rather than later

The young person in question has only been referred to as they/their in the article I read.

It should not have been published, innocent until proven guilty!

If there is any truth in it and there is a subsequent trial it cannot be a fair trial with this level of information and speculation.

The Mother should have kept her mouth shut and only spoken to the Police.

Ourkid
You ask why the presenter is presumed guilty: because his mother saw the video on her sons device.
She went to the sun because the bbc told her they would look into it. There was no more communication with her from the bbc.

Very well put, NanaDana.

Provided there is no speculation on here about who the presenter might be, this thread should remain.

It’s astonishing that the BBC sat on this knowledge for two months, and we will never know how much longer it would have kept quiet had it not been for the Sun newspaper.

This should not be reported about until someone has been charged.

There are multiple layers to this.

1) were there any illegal activities by the BBC employee

2) did the person claim to be 18 to be on one of these sites (only fans etc)

3) did the alleged activities take part during work hours

If it’s no to the first and third, and yes to the second, why is it anyone else’s business?

Can’t quite make him out

anyone working for the BBc or ITV have to be beyond reproach in their public and private life. same as phillip schofield on itv.
you cannot sully the name of the company you work for!

that's why it matters. we will know in a few days and it is said that we will be shocked at who it is. because you see, all the journalists and persons colleagues know already but there lips are sealed.

*Keeleklogger that of course is ITV. when it is a BBC person in the news.

GrannyGravy13

There are multiple layers to this.

1) were there any illegal activities by the BBC employee

2) did the person claim to be 18 to be on one of these sites (only fans etc)

3) did the alleged activities take part during work hours

If it’s no to the first and third, and yes to the second, why is it anyone else’s business?

1) As the police are involved it is assumed there has been illegal activity.
2) This has not been suggested anywhere.
3) If it is proved the presenter was a sexual predator it makes no difference when it happened, I doubt any company would employ someone in that case. Until there is a conclusion to the case it is correct that the person involved should be suspended.

Saying that, none of us know any facts of this case.

lemsip

*Keeleklogger that of course is ITV. when it is a BBC person in the news.

Unless I’ve missed some subtle clue MrBlobby was on the BBC for which they own the rights too.

lemsip

*Keeleklogger that of course is ITV. when it is a BBC person in the news.

He was on the BBC it’s Mr Blobby

MerylStreep

Ourkid
You ask why the presenter is presumed guilty: because his mother saw the video on her sons device.
She went to the sun because the bbc told her they would look into it. There was no more communication with her from the bbc.

As said before, the sex of the young person has not been revealed. They have only been referred to as ‘ my child’.

It's claimed the unnamed star, who was suspended by the BBC on Sunday, allegedly rang the teenager in question - who is now 20 - asking: "What have you done?"

The male presenter also reportedly asked the now 20-year-old to get their mum to "stop the investigation" last week, as it's revealed the BBC were told of the allegations in May

Who leaked this to the press !

The name of the alleged person is now all over social media. Probably wrong.

Sago in reports that I read the mother referred to ‘my son’ (unfortunately I can’t find it now).
However, Al Jazeera are explicitly claiming that it is a girl

www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/7/9/bbc-suspends-presenter-accused-of-paying-teen-for-explicit-images

FC even Al Jazeera aren’t sure what they are reporting as the first paragraph talks about a teenage girl and the second paragraph refers to a youth

The trouble with all this secrecy is others who are innocent will be thought to be guilty. It also encourages rumourmongering. If someone doesn't like your face-watch out.

Don't really understand the declarations of innocence from some presenters. If I knew I was innocent I don't think I'd feel the need to tell anyone other than the police, my nearest and dearest and employer at the time of they were implicated.

Oh you probably would if you were a national name and heard it bandied around Kim

nanna8

The trouble with all this secrecy is others who are innocent will be thought to be guilty. It also encourages rumourmongering. If someone doesn't like your face-watch out.

I think that it will all come out very soon.
If it’s who I think it is, then it was the first person I guessed.
The BBC are now reporting that it’s a news reader

Thanks BlueBelle, yes, that was a bit odd, well spotted

It’s illegal to make indecent images of children, ie under the age of 18. The press report the young person is male and was 17 when the older man began asking him to perform sexual acts, my impression is on line. The young man is now 20. His mother alleges these incidents led him to become addicted to crack.