Jump to content

BBC - AGAIN


Passing Time

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, woolley said:

Do we even know the sex? All I have seen reported, although I certainly haven't sifted through it forensically, is that it involves a male BBC presenter and a teenager. Or are we simply assuming that a male BBC presenter would only be interested in a boy?

 

3 minutes ago, quilp said:

The mother let the cat out of the bag in the initial report. 

That’s what I thought, Quilp.

Although much of the reporting since has been gender neutral, they and their, there have been several uses of “the youth”

Youth is complicated. In one sense, it can be used for young persons of any gender, usually when thinking of young people as a group or in the abstract. “youth culture”, a “youth club”, or a “youth hostel”. In all these cases, there is no distinction of gender. The same applies when the word appears as an abstract noun for the state of being young, as in “in the days of her youth”, “in his youth he was a fine footballer”.

On the other hand, when the word refers to individuals it almost always means young men:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

The MET police have asked the BBC to pause their investigation into the suspended presenter. 

Which suggests that the Police may believe that there is sufficient evidence to start a criminal investigation.  Morally & lawfully they are also obliged to look into these allegations and they are better placed to do so than the BBC.

29 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

All made up like the Cats/Drag Queens in schools? 

Unlike the cats in school it sounds like there is some nugget of truth in here.  Maybe the payments did not start until the youth was 18?  Maybe the youth, who is now 20, has something to lose from this becoming public knowledge which would explain the denial?

It certainly sounds like there is some evidence behind these allegations. 

Once again though The Sun's levels of journalism are shown to be poor.  They had the denial from the Youth's solicitors before they published the story but still chose to proceed and not include the denial in the report.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

Before everyone piles on, just remember the name Carl Beech. He fooled a lot of people.

Whilst the first accusation looks a little odd, the fact that multiple other reports have been made against the same person without their name not being in the public domain (speculation to one side) it would appear that there is more than a grain of truth to this story.

The questions really are;

1. Has a criminal offence been committed?  The Police & CPS need to investigate and decide on this.

2. If no criminal offence has been committed has the individual done enough to warrant the termination of their employment with the BBC?  It would certainly appear that they have brought the BBC into disrepute even if there is no criminal offence.  That could justify dismissal.

I can understand why the BBC were struggling to investigate this matter as the alleged offences appear to have been conducted outside of their employment and not using BBC property.  That would make it difficult for them to obtain any relevant documentation or evidence to act.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...