Nicky Campbell ruled himself out and he and Vine are threatening legal action

[A "household name" BBC presenter accused
of paying a teenager for explicit photos
is facing fresh allegations that
he stripped to his underwear during
a video call with the youth.

The young person's mother said she was
"shocked" after her offspring showed her
a screenshot of the video chat,
in which the unnamed star was sitting in his
boxer shorts on a sofa at his home.]


https://news.sky.com/story/bbc-prese...youth-12917705

Legally there's nothing wrong with an adult sleeping with a sixteen year old, but by any moral standards it's just gross.

Especially if there is a massive age gap and cohersion in the form of payment and power

I note they are not confirming if the 'individual' involved is male or female, I think its a female myself

Bollocks Children Act
he was aged 17

Illegal.


All the News are telling you


The BBC need to find out
when he started

I guess confirming the sex would confirm the sexuality, which would go a way into shortlisting who it was.
... did you read past the part in bold?

The creation of explicit images of under eighteens is obviously illegal (rightfully so!) but for some reason, the UK age of consent is sixteen, showing that Schofield kept within the law.

I don't think he normally appears on the weekend anyway but tomorrow will be the giveaway if he's not on the news

Yes,
Labours Rachel Reeves
on Ridge says the BBC are at fault
for not removing the Presenter
in May 2023
when they were notified

A Media Expert told GBnewsHD
says his name will appear
as other more BBC Male Presenters
will be saying it is not them.

Maybe its Jermaine Jenas or one of One Show presenters

No,
he is married with kids
I doubt it.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/celeb...jenas-21890358

In a somewhat odd quirk of the law, while an adult can legally have sex with a 16 or 17 year old, having sexually explicit IMAGES of anyone under 18 is illegal and classed as child porn. Bizarre really. "Yeah you can **** 'em but if you take a picture of it you're a nonce".

But that's how it is.

My sister-in-law had a friend as a teenager who was almost charges with possession of child pornography when he was 20, because he had nudes of his 17 year old girlfriend. Which I have to say is really quite an insane situation.

But yeah a 50 year old with nudes of a teenager can **** off to jail.

The mum says it started when her son was 17

Once every other presenter has said its not them, it'll become obvious as it'll be the only one who hasn't said anything :laugh:

See above sheriff, sexual images of anyone under 18 is classed as child porn.

This has been going on for three years, the person is now 20
So they could delete any images they have at them at 17 and still be within the law

Yes, the Mother found out it started
when that lad was 17.


She contacted the BBC.
They took all the info.


Her Horror
the next week
the Public Paid BBC Presenter
was still on her TV screen.

She gave the BBC time,
but then went to the Sun Newspaper
and was not paid for her story.

as BS said above....illegal

your attitude to this is :umm2: why are you trying to find loopholes for this perv

17 is a child, like it or not

the direct payments into their bank account cannot be erased

where has it been confirmed that it is a 'lad'

Sure that's still to be confirmed.

It will end up being someone most of us have never heard of :laugh:

Yes LT
amazing they have Not
Suspended the BBC Worker


Massive BBC Error

He's an older guy aged 60. Just my suspicion.