Gary Lineker, Rylan Clark and Jeremy Vine rule themselves out of being the latest BBC pervert

The current state of play is a 3rd party is paying a multinational law firm to ensure the young persons story matches with Person X at the BBC, while The Sun has doubled down and said they've got the evidence, and News at Ten starts in 30 mins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

The current state of play is a 3rd party is paying a multinational law firm to ensure the young persons story matches with Person X at the BBC, while The Sun has doubled down and said they've got the evidence, and News at Ten starts in 30 mins.

---

The News At Ten?

Is that where the truth will be revealled?

Tender hooks here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

The News At Ten?

Is that where the truth will be revealled?

Tender hooks here!

---

No, but the nation is waiting to see who reads tonight's news!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

No, but the nation is waiting to see who reads tonight's news!

---

My money's on Rageh Omaar

Regardless of who racks up on the News tonight things are getting a little clearer.

If the Sun has evidence the accused engaged in this relationship such that explicit material was exchanged before she was 18 then the BBC presenter is in a lot of trouble.

If The Sun has no such proof, even if the events took place as stated then what crime between two consenting adults has taken place such that the privacy of those two adults needed to be intruded in the public interest.

At the very least the Sun looks vulnerable in not printing the rebuttal from the alleged victim given that they had received it prior to going to press with the story.

So is Mr Blobby off the hook or is his crinkly bottom still twitching?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

Regardless of who racks up on the News tonight things are getting a little clearer.

If the Sun has evidence the accused engaged in this relationship such that explicit material was exchanged before she was 18 then the BBC presenter is in a lot of trouble.

If The Sun has no such proof, even if the events took place as stated then what crime between two consenting adults has taken place such that the privacy of those two adults needed to be intruded in the public interest.

At the very least the Sun looks vulnerable in not printing the rebuttal from the alleged victim given that they had received it prior to going to press with the story.

---

It looks as though The Sun are acting on behalf of the parents, who seem sure there is substance to their allegations regarding their child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

It looks as though The Sun are acting on behalf of the parents, who seem sure there is substance to their allegations regarding their child.

---

It looks to me like the Sun is acting on behalf of the Sun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

It looks to me like the Sun is acting on behalf of the Sun.

---

The parents were ignored by the BBC and there are also 3rd party lawyers involved, so my guess is the parents thought they needed some help as nobody was listening to them. It seems to have worked, as the BBC are now taking them seriously, and all that's missing is the truth which will come out eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

The current state of play is a 3rd party is paying a multinational law firm to ensure the young persons story matches with Person X at the BBC, while The Sun has doubled down and said they've got the evidence, and News at Ten starts in 30 mins.

---

So, the News at Ten, now starts at 21.57 !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

The parents were ignored by the BBC and there are also 3rd party lawyers involved, so my guess is the parents thought they needed some help as nobody was listening to them. It seems to have worked, as the BBC are now taking them seriously, and all that's missing is the truth which will come out eventually.

---

Well, you’ve certainly been doing plenty of guessing already in this thread, so I suppose one more won’t make much difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

It's quite accurate because the three people in the thread title all denied having an inappropriate relationship with an underage person.

---

And the latest BBC pervert bit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fingers

Well…he’s Welsh

---

....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Well, you’ve certainly been doing plenty of guessing already in this thread, so I suppose one more won’t make much difference.

---

How to go from I know more than I am letting on, but this could potentially be devastating for the BBC if it plays out in a certain way to "it looks as though" and "my guess is in 24 hours.

Whether this person will be punished by law I can't see any winners in this. At its heart is an estranged broken family in an alien world of lawyers and massive corporations. Their lives are unlikely to come out better than before the story broke. Probably cast aside by the protagonists with little thought for their welfare.

Regardless of whether a criminal act has taken place, if there is truth in the allegations then it is not easy to see how the presenter didn't bring his employer into disrepute by his actions and his position is likely to be untenable in the way that Schofield's became.

The BBC will be under the spotlight for the speed and transparency it dealt with any initial complaint and the Sun for whether their agenda and dislike of all things BBC clouded their editorial judgement in how they handled the case, the pre-print denial by the lawyers for the teenager as was and the balance between the right to privacy and the public interest.

All speculation but I find it a really sad tale in the salacious world we now live in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Well, you’ve certainly been doing plenty of guessing already in this thread, so I suppose one more won’t make much difference.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Well, you’ve certainly been doing plenty of guessing already in this thread, so I suppose one more won’t make much difference.

---

I got it from the BBC. The family contacted the BBC on 19th March and they never heard back from them. They only sprung into action after the Sun article appeared. The same article also prompted Person X to make contact with the young person by phone. However, they didn't mention who is paying for the multinational law firm that are assisting the young person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyril evans awaydays

How to go from I know more than I am letting on, but this could potentially be devastating for the BBC if it plays out in a certain way to "it looks as though" and "my guess is in 24 hours.

---

I'm sticking to what is being reported in the media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

I got it from the BBC. The family contacted the BBC on 19th March and they never heard back from them. They only sprung into action after the Sun article appeared. The same article also prompted Person X to make contact with the young person by phone. However, they didn't mention who is paying for the multinational law firm that are assisting the young person.

---

You mean 19 May don’t you? Everything I’ve read says that the parents first contacted the BBC in May.

I've ruled myself out and about to take BBC to court for not disclosing the truth , what it investigated last year , why shop floor BBC folk are underpaid and we grossly use takepayers money to fund shite behaviour and arrogance.. oh is it true over 100 higher paid folk at this dreadful organisation are being investigated by HMRC..

Was a great fan back in the day other than the odd drama, old series like Fast Show or I Player it's best left alone as its a total woke.

Sell it use dosh to make lives better .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

You mean 19 May don’t you? Everything I’ve read says that the parents first contacted the BBC in May.

---

Yep, you're right it was 19 May.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I've ruled myself out and about to take BBC to court for not disclosing the truth , what it investigated last year , why shop floor BBC folk are underpaid and we grossly use takepayers money to fund shite behaviour and arrogance.. oh is it true over 100 higher paid folk at this dreadful organisation are being investigated by HMRC..

Was a great fan back in the day other than the odd drama, old series like Fast Show or I Player it's best left alone as its a total woke.

Sell it use dosh to make lives better .

---

It would be hard to use the dosh made from selling the BBC to have a more positive impact on such a wide range and number of people than it does now.

But all ears to hear what your suggestion is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

I've ruled myself out and about to take BBC to court for not disclosing the truth , what it investigated last year , why shop floor BBC folk are underpaid and we grossly use takepayers money to fund shite behaviour and arrogance.. oh is it true over 100 higher paid folk at this dreadful organisation are being investigated by HMRC..

Was a great fan back in the day other than the odd drama, old series like Fast Show or I Player it's best left alone as its a total woke.

Sell it use dosh to make lives better .

---

How does the BBC fund the behaviour of its employees? Are you of the opinion that the haulage company that Peter Sutcliffe worked for subsidised his reign of terror?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Yep, you're right it was 19 May.

---

So you was wrong then

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

we grossly use takepayers money to fund shite behaviour and arrogance.

---

This is a thread about the BBC not the Tory party

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

This is a thread about the BBC not the Tory party

---

Game, set and match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

So you was wrong then

---

It was a couple of days ago that I read it, and the impact on events are unchanged, so you're just being your usual antagonistic self :biggrin: