BBC presenter allegations.

I have a question.
Is it yet known for sure if the young people in this case are male or female?

Clever old Murdoch. Not only has he destroyed a few lives, Edwards and the young person whose mother broke the story. But he’s also managed to get everyone on the forum arguing with each other. There are no winners in this except sales of his ‘newspaper’ ( hard to even describe it as that).

I dont think we need help from Murdoch to argue Maybee, we can manage that independently

Germanshepherdsmum

Thank you Galaxy and Dickens. There are many things on which posters agree and disagree with one another, but it should be possible to do so without nastiness and personal insults. As you and the vast majority of others prove.

So does that mean you are going to stop insulting those who don't share your view - which has so far been found by those with the actual powers to do so, to be unsubstantiated?

JenniferEccles

I have a question.
Is it yet known for sure if the young people in this case are male or female?

I just wouldn't go there JenniferEccles. There is no "case". The police have not found anything illegal.

However, I am sure that will not stop the make believe. Enjoy.

He may not have committed a criminal offence, but paying a 17 year old 1000’s for sexually explicit photos ( when you’re a married man with 5 children ) is pretty disgusting behaviour.
Some on here doubt he’s done anything wrong at all & it’s all lies - maybe?
No doubt he will tell hi side of the story when he’s ready.
But not coming out immediately & denying it is a bit odd.

The alleged "victim" must have been over 18. If younger, it would be illegal, and the police would have pursued it.

Behaviour online between adults can be poor, by some standards, but it's not illegal.

DiamondLilly
the police would have pursued it that would be the Met Police who only hours before Wayne Couzens murdered Sarah Everard looked at CCTV footage of Couzens exposing himself to staff and dismissed it. I think not.

Where have I insulted anyone not sharing my view (whatever you mean by that) here Daisy?

When I used the word ‘case’ I didn’t mean it in any criminal sense.
Ok, if you prefer ‘news item’.
Were the youths involved girls or boys or has that information been disclosed?

MerylStreep

DiamondLilly
the police would have pursued it that would be the Met Police who only hours before Wayne Couzens murdered Sarah Everard looked at CCTV footage of Couzens exposing himself to staff and dismissed it. I think not.

No, of course, what happened with Sarah Everard, and others, were beyond shocking.

The Met, beyond doubt, needs root and branch reform. As a female Londoner, for the first time ever, I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

But, with the huge amount of attention with all this, this past week, I imagine the assessment, by the Met, was carried out by someone very senior.

South Wales Police were approached by the parents , they investigated and nothing illegal was found. This was before they went to the BBC and the Sun

Germanshepherdsmum

Where have I insulted anyone not sharing my view (whatever you mean by that) here Daisy?

I really don’t think that you have Shep
I think that this thread has gone completely bananas 🍌

Kandinsky

He may not have committed a criminal offence, but paying a 17 year old 1000’s for sexually explicit photos ( when you’re a married man with 5 children ) is pretty disgusting behaviour.
Some on here doubt he’s done anything wrong at all & it’s all lies - maybe?
No doubt he will tell hi side of the story when he’s ready.
But not coming out immediately & denying it is a bit odd.

Some have suggested that blackmail is involved, which does sound more plausible.
It would explain a couple of things

Thanks Fanny. I don’t believe I have. It really isn’t necessary for things to become so nasty.

“ The hypocrisy of this paper which daily features photo's of near-naked women - celebrities, sports stars, influencers, etc (all perfectly 'legal') adopting a moralising tone in its reporting of this matter which, it seems, does not warrant any further investigation by the police, is so stunning that I'm surprised more people aren't knocked-out by it.”

👏👏👏 Thank you Dickens

If there is any truth as regards the sums alleged to have been paid, that’s a very great deal of money Fanny.

Germanshepherdsmum

Thanks Fanny. I don’t believe I have. It really isn’t necessary for things to become so nasty.

I could see that I was going to get it it the neck fit no good reason yesterday, so I hid the thread until this morning.
It seems that if someone doesn’t like the cut of one’s gib, they will be like a dog with a bone

Germanshepherdsmum

Just a couple of people turning on the rest Gramaretto.

So you, the majority, are "afraid" of the "couple of people" who simply don't agree with how you have all been prepare to attack others on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.

Because that is where the difference is. You just choose to call it ridiculous names to try and chase away a different view.

As for someone being "scared and distressed", hasn't MN, in the past, been involved in a court case where they had to reveal the name of a poster?

Surely, if you think a bus might come round the corner you warn the person walking across the road. You do not wait until it happens.

That sums it up pretty well.

That was to Fanny.

Thank you GSM

Afraid? Scared? Distressed? I don’t think so apart from Jaffacake who was wrongly told she might face a defamation action and believed it, poor woman.

You obviously didn’t see that my post was intended for Fanny, not you Daisy.

Kandinsky

He may not have committed a criminal offence, but paying a 17 year old 1000’s for sexually explicit photos ( when you’re a married man with 5 children ) is pretty disgusting behaviour.

He patently HASN’T been doing what you say as that’s against the law. The police have investigated again and concluded there’s been no criminality. Therefore no evidence of paying a 17 yr old for pictures. Surely you realise this by now?

If he had, would it be less disgusting if he wasn’t married with 5 children?