Breaking news. The boy now says nothing happened. nothing unlawful. nothing to see here. Send more money.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66159357 Claims made by the mother at the heart of the BBC presenter scandal are "rubbish", a lawyer representing the young person has said. In a letter to the BBC, the lawyer makes claims that throw doubt on the story that has dominated front pages through the weekend. It says the young person sent a denial to the Sun on Friday evening saying there was "no truth to it". However, the "inappropriate article" was still published, the lawyer said. A spokesperson for the Sun said: "We have reported a story about two very concerned parents who made a complaint to the BBC about the behaviour of a presenter and the welfare of their child. "Their complaint was not acted upon by the BBC. "We have seen evidence that supports their concerns. It's now for the BBC to properly investigate." BBC News does not know the identity of the young person and has not spoken directly to them. It has not seen any of the Sun's body of evidence, or the dossier the Sun reported was handed to the corporation by the family over the weekend. In their letter, the lawyer writes: "For the avoidance of doubt, nothing inappropriate or unlawful has taken place between our client and the BBC personality and the allegations reported in the Sun newspaper are rubbish."
Why did the "concerned" parents contact The Sun and The BBC but not the police? There's a rabbit off somewhere.
The pitfalls of working for a Welsh company. I really really didn't need to see the image doing the rounds
Is it known that they had never approached either the BBC, or the Police? Queer things newspapers, but they aren't stupid, and if they have evidence.....
I doubt it actually. If a newspaper has evidence, the minimum it will do is protect it's own position. It depends on what the evidence is of course. And it also depends on whether or not any activity, even if strictly legal, is becoming of a public figure with a bit of power. The BBC, as it has done before will circle the wagons and protect their own. They've been doing it for decades, but the story is not bound to go away at all.
They did report it to the BBC as I said. The way it is worded suggests that they didn't go to the Police though. The newspaper have also sensationalised it further, by deliberately ignoring the other side of the argument, that the alleged victim contacted them and stated that the allegation was rubbish. I'm not suggesting that the whole story has been rubbished either, nobody knows really. My own opinion though is that parents who go to the Sun to sell the story rather than go to the Police, have ulterior motives than just the welfare of their child.
I wouldn't be surprised at all . But it really does depend on this "evidence". I'd be surprised if this just died.
Of course they have ulterior motives. With the paper they know they'll get a result, a payout and revenge. What will they get from the BBC, an internal enquiry that takes months and gets nowhere ... ... and a police investigation like the one Jimmy Saville 'endured' for decades. If the crack addict has been sponging off Huw he'll have been a drain on his parents I'd imagine ... ... perhaps it's payback time.
It's The Sun, 'wot done it' Now who would have thought the Dirty Digger's rag would make a story up. Or not! If this 20 year old's lawyer is saying its all bollocks... the mother is not doing her offspring any favours, or has the Sun (which never hacked mobiles?) Paid the Mother a large sum for a story and not fact checked? Awaiting the next instalment of the non-story?
Defence is easy though, the paper hasn’t named him, so technically he hasn’t been libelled by them. Now all the twitter accounts and websites who released his name they’re probably fair game.
