BBC presenter allegations.

Smileless2012

None of this should have been made public until someone's been charged.

I agree. I think the police are looking into it now.

Well, the young lad involved, has said, through his lawyer, that the allegations are rubbish, and he's now talking about suing for lack of privacy.

God knows.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66159357

Does the latest news mean the mother made it all up?

Sorry - I didn't refresh the page - my comment to Kate was about how I would feel if I were the mum.

GrannyGravy13

No doubt all those who have been incorrectly named on other social media sites will have their lawyers on speed dial and be looking forward to a few £’s in defamation damages.

Yes, and rightly so.

Kate I don't know what I would do in the circumstances, but it would feel like a slap in the face to keep seeing him on the screen.

Casdon you are, I'm sure, right about the extent of 'dodgy behaviour' (for want of a better phrase) on sites like Only Fans. None of us can be sure that our nearest and dearest would never get involved, just as we can't be certain that they would never get addicted to drugs or other substances.

Time will tell what the outcome of this will be. Whether the young person and the mother are singing from the same hymn sheet remains to be seen - it looks unlikely, but the police should be able to get to the truth.

If anyone thinks that they don’t know or are in anyway connected to someone who doesn’t use or even work on these sites you’re incredibly naive.

What I can’t understand is why the BBC person is somehow responsible for turning this ‘innocent child’ into a crack addict. Surely the crack habit was already there and probably the reason the young person was doing what they did. I don’t think calling this man a predator is acceptable.

As for not wanting to see him on our screens - wouldn’t bother me. If you’re so ignorant of the foibles of people, especially those in showbiz, you need to take the rose tinted specs off. You see many people on screen who get up to all sorts of unsavoury stuff; you just don’t know about it.

I think everyone is entitled to a private life - and if nothing illegal took place - then it would make no difference to me whether that person stayed on tv or not. However since I watch little or no tv, the chances are that I wouldn't see them anyway. Equally the chances are that I haven't heard of them either.

Casdon

Kate1949

IF and I emphasise IF, it transpires that a famous person has been paying a young person to do what has been alleged, assuming nothing illegal has taken place, who on here would be happy to continue to see them on our screens? I'm just interested. Just a hypothetical question.

It’s a good question. I suspect the truth is that there are many thousands of people, both in the public eye and others we know, who we would probably never expect, including children and grandchildren, on sites like Only Fans who are doing just that. There must be, it’s a British site with 210 million subscribers. There are other sites too.
It’s a terrifying thought.

Oh yes, the chances are than many on here will know someone who is doing OnlyFans (or similar sites). I have a friend whose daughter does extremely well for herself on OF - she's already bought a house with the proceeds. Remarkably, both of her parents are absolutely fine with what she posts - and believe me, her content is extremely explicit. Her body, her choice, of course - but how of many us would want our daughters, granddaughters etc doing it?

Well yeah if we all pretend that sex work is work and it's all so empowering for young women, we end up with this kind of mess.

No, not happy.

Kate1949

IF and I emphasise IF, it transpires that a famous person has been paying a young person to do what has been alleged, assuming nothing illegal has taken place, who on here would be happy to continue to see them on our screens? I'm just interested. Just a hypothetical question.

It’s a good question. I suspect the truth is that there are many thousands of people, both in the public eye and others we know, who we would probably never expect, including children and grandchildren, on sites like Only Fans who are doing just that. There must be, it’s a British site with 210 million subscribers. There are other sites too.
It’s a terrifying thought.

I've reported the fool above.

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

If they were under 18 and it was photos it's illegal.
For those who say people wouldnt worry if it wasnt someone famous, the owner of a local restaurant in my area was arrested and found guilty for making videos of an under 18.

If I didn't want to see them I'd turn off or turnover Kate.

Yes thats true.

Kate1949

IF and I emphasise IF, it transpires that a famous person has been paying a young person to do what has been alleged, assuming nothing illegal has taken place, who on here would be happy to continue to see them on our screens? I'm just interested. Just a hypothetical question.

The BBC is funded by us, not sure I would want to see them on screen, but then again there is an off button and I have the option to turn them off…

DaisyAnne good post 17.23.51

IF and I emphasise IF, it transpires that a famous person has been paying a young person to do what has been alleged, assuming nothing illegal has taken place, who on here would be happy to continue to see them on our screens? I'm just interested. Just a hypothetical question.

I have a question I ask myself at difficult times and have asked others when they feel a real lack of agency. It is "What outcome do you want?" Sometimes the outcome is impossible and you have to work backwards to the possible.

In this case the parent seemed to want the return to health of her child. That may not have been possible, and was almost certainly not possible immediately.

What you can see is that the Sun did not set out to bring this outcome about. Splashing it all over the front of a tabloid was never going to make things better. We can only hope that, regardless of the legal outcomes, they do get help.

I said earlier today - the police, definitely not the Sun, since the family told the Sun about the telephone calls I regret I do question the motives

Nobody has said what they would do if their child or grandchild were suffering at the hands of someone in the public eye and that person's employer took no notice of their complaint.

Well I didn’t know we’d been asked, but I would take it directly to the police. I can’t think of any logical reason to involve the person’s employer either.

But then I’ve had good experiences with the police and don’t judge the whole British force by the actions of scumbag Wayne Couzens and his ilk, or even by the standards of the Met. No more than I would refuse to go for medical help because of the actions of Harold Shipman, Beverley Allitt, David Fuller, etc, etc, etc.

Exactly GrannyGravy.

Doodledog

*No-one has been named on here, there is no prosecution as yet, if at all, and no trial which might be prejudiced.*

'Some on here' don't let that get in the way of a chance to form their own self-righteous mob and sneer at others, though, do they? As has been said, we are discussing the News on the News and Politics forum in a discussion board, not knitting at a guillotine, which is a strange analogy for this situation anyway.

*And what did they ( The Met) do when they knew what an evil perverted bastard Wayne Couzens was, they left him to rape and torture women and eventually murder Sarah Everard.
That’s the harm they did*
Well said, MerylStreep. There have been several instances when things have been reported to the police and to TV channels who have done nothing about it.

As for the GB News dig - I can only speak for myself, but I would feel the same if someone on there were accused. They have nobody with as much money or clout as do the BBC (unless Piers Morgan is on there, in which case he might qualify) so the ability to pay for injunctions and expensive PR is lessened, but the principle remains. I have absolutely nothing against the man in question, but don't think that pleas for justice should be ignored.

Nobody has said what they would do if their child or grandchild were suffering at the hands of someone in the public eye and that person's employer took no notice of their complaint. It must be very difficult to be up against an institution such as the BBC (or ITV, or GB News, for that matter) as a 'little person', particularly if they refuse to engage.

I don't think it's about a desire to condemn, Casdon. When people are found guilty I am usually in the 'temper justice with mercy' camp. I'm not motivated by a punitive mentality at all. I do, however, think that justice should be available to everyone, whether they are ambitious young men wanting to break into TV or those who are selling their bodies to get money for drugs. When powerful institutions close ranks there is no justice, and that is when things like this happen. If the BBC had acted when the mother contacted them, things may never have got this far.

I agree with much of what you say, but I come back to your last sentence Doodledog. We don’t yet know what exactly the original allegation was, and whether the BBC did act on it, and if so whether that action was appropriate or inappropriate. That’s a good example of what I was trying to say - there’s so much assumption. People do look for somebody to blame, we’re all guilty of it - but when it’s peoples lives we’re talking about and we only have a few facts we should hold our fire.

Before anyone accuses me of ‘rumour, speculation etc etc’
I have just been reporting what the BBC have been broadcasting, the very folk who are at the thick of it.

But if you do want to accuse me of ‘rumour, speculation etc’; I had a hunch that something was going on a few years ago 😉