[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the bbc did nothing for 2 months after the allegation was first made. They have done their utmost to cover the whole thing up. That requires investigation

I think you are forgetting the recent events with Philip scholfield

ITV asked the questions and the presenter told them the accusations/rumours were not true, the same could be said about this situation

Look what happened to cliff Richard

People made false accusations, his home was raided live on tv

He was cleared and was he not awarded a massive some of money?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

I think you are forgetting the recent events with Philip scholfield

ITV asked the questions and the presenter told them the accusations/rumours were not true, the same could be said about this situation

Look what happened to cliff Richar

People made false accusations, his home was raided live on tv

He was cleared and was he not awarded a massive some of money?

The complaint was made on the 19th May...how long do the BBC need... they victim blamed the mother saying she didn't give them enough information, its only after it came out in the press they have swung into action....shameful

[Cherie]

Did Kay Burley just confirm it was a boy there, she mentioned 'son' then backtracked.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The complaint was made on the 19th May...how long do the BBC need... they victim blamed the mother saying she didn't give them enough information, its only after it came out in the press they have swung into action....shameful

See reference to above post to bitontheside
Bbc ending up paying out 2 million to cliff Richard for getting it wrong

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

See reference to above post to bitontheside
Bbc ending up paying out 2 million to cliff Richard for getting it wrong

Cliff Richard was an allegation that could be denied

This case had phone conversations by text, money transfers and a pic of the accused semi-naked on the child's phone

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Cliff Richard was an allegation that could be denied

This case had phone conversations by text, money transfers and a pic of the accused semi-naked on the child's phone

If it can’t be proven that they were 17 at the time there is no criminal case
Just like Phil

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

If it can’t be proven that they were 17 at the time there is no criminal case
Just like Phil

the evidence will all be dated (phone logs) so that wont be a problem

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

the evidence will all be dated (phone logs) so that wont be a problem

You don’t know that because it’s not the alleged victim making the claim it’s his mother

Who knows if the alleged victim will cooperate

Questions about Phil meeting the guy while under aged we’re asked the victim in that case gave no evidence to say any wrongdoing had gone on so no charge for mr Phil

[Crimson Dynamo]

Just said on Talk TV the presenter earns over £410,000 a year


https://www.prolificnorth.co.uk/news...ries-list-full

[bots]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

If it can’t be proven that they were 17 at the time there is no criminal case
Just like Phil

it doesnt need to be a criminal case. Simply put, if the guy has tarnished the reputation of the bbc that is grounds for dismissal, end of. That's why this whole investigation drama is a joke. If they even have a sniff of impropriety, they can get shot of him

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it doesnt need to be a criminal case. Simply put, if the guy has tarnished the reputation of the bbc that is grounds for dismissal, end of. That's why this whole investigation drama is a joke. If they even have a sniff of impropriety, they can get shot of him

I’m not disagreeing with that but if there is no criminal case he will be given a lump sum to go quietly