phil can no longer do the fingers in ears, i'm superior role anymore and that penny has yet to drop

At least now we’ve confirmed that people are don’t care whether he actually broke the law or not and are just gonna accuse him of things anyway, yet people waiting for any actual allegations to come forward before judging are irrational

The people now speaking out have probably been bottling it up for up to 20 years, so it's hardly a surprise they can't wait to stick the boot in :laugh:

.

This guy claims everyone knew about his tendencies … and yet HE along with everyone else did nothing .,

Maybe they should start hounding Eamon Holmes now and demanding to know why he didn’t raise the issue ..

He’s just like JSP and EsRan … they also knew ‘things’ but kept quiet as and yet they all love a good rant when it suits them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/05...5353596505.jpg


how nice

Phillip Schofield's younger brother is a Paedophile/ Phillip 'Fully' leaves ITV
 

Maybe ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Its legality v morality though to be honest.

I'm not liking the nonce label bandied about so easily but I would be out for blood if a much older family friend suddenly decided to have a sexual reltionship with my son after knowing him since a child. I'd be raising some very serious concerns about their intentions during his childhood

Its not accusing him of things, it's the things he's actually admitted to. And not judging him for those things isn't "irrational" but it is, to be honest, quite concerning.

I'll judge him much more harshly if allegations of an actual crime come out but it's unnecessary in terms of how I feel about him and what he's done based on the verified facts -- the things he's admitted to quite openly. I have literally no need to wait for more information before forming that opinion. It's based on already established information, nothing baseless.

all perfectly normal and legal

nothing to see here


:whistle:

As would 90% of parents no doubt. It's grooming and it's creepy. And it's not "just because he's gay" there's plenty of straight men who are paedophiles or borderline as well, I think they should ALL be called out.

It falls quite firmly within the definition of grooming - he formed a relationship with him when he was a child, the fact that it wasn't sexual until legal age isn't relevant at all to that. Grooming is a descriptor of a behaviour, it's not a legal definition.

I think what (perhaps, being charitable) is happening is that people are conflating it with simple "big age gap" relationships which are quite different. I personally still find them a bit problematic when the younger person is VERY young (e.g. Leo and his conveyor belt of 20 year olds) but in those cases it's just a bit sad/personally gross. Its how far back the relationship goes that's the issue. If MM had simply joined ITV at 18 and met Philip then that would be one thing - but that's not the situation or even close. He's been in clear regular contact with him since he was a child. That's an absolutely massive red flag.

I think there's extra defensiveness over it because he's gay but it's nothing to do with that, the situation would be exactly the same if he was straight and this was a girl, and (I have to say) I thi k some of the people who are saying this is fine would be more willing to see how dodgy it is if it WAS a young girl.

I also think in some ways it would be worse for a girl because I think ultimately MM will do fine career-wise despite all of this. I think if it was a female, they'd have the same sympathy, but basically be tarred for life.

Can you IMAGINE the reaction if Piers Morgan had met a 10 year old through ITV, slid into her DM's at 15 and started a sexual relationship with her at 16-18?

Please Liam and Glenn, please try to argue that you'd take a "wait and see if he broke the law before judging" approach if that was the situation.

I think it's fairly obvious that you'd be all over it as soon as there was a sniff of inappropriate behaviour.

You both PROVABLY have no problem calling out Prince Andrew for his actions with teenage girls.

Why are you picking up the shields and going on the march for Philip?

The fact that Scofes statement was so carefully worded shows he'e legally covering himself too. He made a point of saying the relationship was 'consensual' Its never good when that word is used.

He also states that was 'Unwise but not illegal'. There was no denial in his statement.

It creepy for a middle aged person to start a relationship with someone they've known as a child.

Of course it is, everyone knows that, I don't believe anyone who says it's not.

oop

"Pip" :joker: that's the real fightin' talk. That's a burn.

Also, the fact Scofe has admitted to lying to so many people could leave him in legal trouble. He and Holly need to shut up.

.

I think ITV would probably have grounds to sue him over the (let's face it) destruction of This Morning BUT I don't think they will. In terms of individuals, I don't know that he's actually slandered anyone, it's mostly just lies of omission.

Things certainly aren't looking so Great, Expectations are low ...

Sixteen is a child, and regardless of legality it's creepy for any middle aged person to start a relationship with a 16 year old.

I'm referring more to the admission of untruths. It would set a precedent if Mr McGreevy ever sues Schofield.

True.

I see neither Glenn nor Liam has responded to my post asking whether they'd approve if they had a son of 18, sorry 16, who someone in their 50s had taken an unhealthy interest in since they were 10 and furthermore would approve if said 50 year old began sleeping with them the minute it was legal. Disgusting. I think proof will emerge eventually of the alleged grooming. Like someone said the boy in question, Matthew, has yet to be offered money fir his story.