oowee Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 Apparently as its a HR issue with an employee the BBC have a legal duty of care to protect the name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 8 minutes ago, Ratlegs said: Time it was closed down Defunded. If you want to watch it, pay a subscription. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udderlyoffroad Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 20 minutes ago, Penelope said: Is this not reason enough, whether any laws have been broken or not? Exactly, the conduct alone of said presenter - funding the narcotics habit of an addict - is enough to cause serious reputational damage to the BBC. I don't believe for one moment that there isn't a clause in his contract allowing for immediate termination in such cases. The possible criminal matter - i.e. alleged receiving of intimate pictures from someone who is above the age of consent but below 18, is one for the police to investigate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mellors Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 The media know its just how long they can hold off to be first. We'll know soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rim Fire Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 Look at the BBC news tonight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 39 minutes ago, Penelope said: Is this not reason enough, whether any laws have been broken or not? In any case, the presenter in question hasn't denied soliciting pictures of a young male, in return for money to feed his drug-habit. That kind of conduct should be instant summary dismissal, no need for 'placing them on leave', escort off the premises by security immediately, pass file to police. Reason enough for what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, Scully said: Reason enough for what? To out the dirty so and so who has been using my money for his sordid jollies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 19 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said: Exactly, the conduct alone of said presenter - funding the narcotics habit of an addict - is enough to cause serious reputational damage to the BBC. I don't believe for one moment that there isn't a clause in his contract allowing for immediate termination in such cases. The possible criminal matter - i.e. alleged receiving of intimate pictures from someone who is above the age of consent but below 18, is one for the police to investigate. I’m not sure it’s been established yet, as to whether he knew he was funding drug addiction; according to last nights news it was the mother who informed either the BBC or the Sun that is what her son was spending the money on. Did the BBC bloke know that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discobob Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 24 minutes ago, mellors said: The media know its just how long they can hold off to be first. We'll know soon. That is factually inaccurate - Is Alex Belfield allowed to be that close to Jezzer Vile/Vine after AB publicised JV's home address (that is freely available on Companies House)??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Penelope said: To out the dirty so and so who has been using my money for his sordid jollies. Well if he’s an adult it’s up to him what he spends HIS money ( not yours ) on, and if the other party gave consent ( 16 and over ) then the crux of the matter is the complicated legislation regarding images of possibly vulnerable late teens and social media. It’s a confusing and complicated issue and we have to tread very very carefully nowadays. Trial by social media can be a killer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mellors Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, discobob said: That is factually inaccurate - Is Alex Belfield allowed to be that close to Jezzer Vile/Vine after AB publicised JV's home address (that is freely available on Companies House)??? Don't understand what facts aren't correct. They definitely know the mother gave all the information to a news paper and your not telling me most of the work colleagues of who ever it's been alleged don't know. Edited July 10, 2023 by mellors Missed word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 "i tellee wot boi.............this story is like half a dozen blokes who all have a large bowl of prunes for afters at last nights tea time.....they are outside a toilet that is locked and they are all suffering from the turtels head...or in more polite terms "touching cloth".....they are all looking at each other desperatly hoping that someone else will be the first one to disgrace themself........... i think the person should fess up ...so we can move onto the next phase of "oooohhhh and arrrrrrr....tut tut.... well i never.....oooooo shuldnt be allowed" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mellors Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 7 minutes ago, ditchman said: "i tellee wot boi.............this story is like half a dozen blokes who all have a large bowl of prunes for afters at last nights tea time.....they are outside a toilet that is locked and they are all suffering from the turtels head...or in more polite terms "touching cloth".....they are all looking at each other desperatly hoping that someone else will be the first one to disgrace themself........... i think the person should fess up ...so we can move onto the next phase of "oooohhhh and arrrrrrr....tut tut.... well i never.....oooooo shuldnt be allowed" Don't spoil it its raining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 We are actually discussing CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE here aren't we, the person was apparently 17 when it all ALLEGEDLY started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shootthepigeon Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mellors Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 5 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: We are actually discussing CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE here aren't we, the person was apparently 17 when it all ALLEGEDLY started. I'm sure we are all aware of that as awful as that is. I rightly or wrongly assumed the thread is who is it !!!. Although the answer is out there were waiting for confirmation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rim Fire Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 16 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: We are actually discussing CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE here aren't we, the person was apparently 17 when it all ALLEGEDLY started. I thought you had to be 16 for sex it has something to do with sexual pics you need to be 18 i think that is where the problem lies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rem260 Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 20 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: We are actually discussing CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE here aren't we, the person was apparently 17 when it all ALLEGEDLY started. It depends on who you talk too. Normally children are referred to as young adults by the woke and enlightened. That is until something like this happens and they are magically transported back to being children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbob Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 The BBC had a meeting with the met today so it will be out soon seems they haven't learned anything since Saville, time to take the licence fee off them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Rim Fire said: I thought you had to be 16 for sex it has something to do with sexual pics you need to be 18 i think that is where the problem lies This. To share explicit content you must be 18. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 So now the "young persons" lawyer is claiming the mothers claims are rubbish. Saying the mother is estranged to the Son, and that the Sun newspaper has made false claims.. Utter shambles this. Could potentially ruin someone's career over something that either never happened or was perfectly legal and consenting adults.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 43 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said: So now the "young persons" lawyer is claiming the mothers claims are rubbish. Saying the mother is estranged to the Son, and that the Sun newspaper has made false claims.. Utter shambles this. Could potentially ruin someone's career over something that either never happened or was perfectly legal and consenting adults.. Also possible that the alleged offender has offered to pay the alleged victim to keep quiet, who knows. Time will likely tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldypigeonpopper Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 1 hour ago, ShootingEgg said: So now the "young persons" lawyer is claiming the mothers claims are rubbish. Saying the mother is estranged to the Son, and that the Sun newspaper has made false claims.. Utter shambles this. Could potentially ruin someone's career over something that either never happened or was perfectly legal and consenting adults.. Hello, or maybe a lawyer paid for by the BBC 🤔 pure speculation of course, estranged or not a mother is still a mother who sees her son as a drug user if I'm correct and if that money came from the unknown BBC presenter I would still want justice 🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 36 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said: Hello, or maybe a lawyer paid for by the BBC 🤔 pure speculation of course, estranged or not a mother is still a mother who sees her son as a drug user if I'm correct and if that money came from the unknown BBC presenter I would still want justice 🤔 Justice for what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted July 10, 2023 Report Share Posted July 10, 2023 33 minutes ago, Scully said: Justice for what? This. Currently there is nothing but speculation and accusations... Just another rag printing a story which could be utter nonsense. The met from what I understand are not taking it further at this stage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.