Who's the BBC presenter ...

[TopCat.]

"The presenter, who has been suspended, has not been named" says Reeta Chakrabarty on News at 10, standing in for Huw Edwards . . . .

You must log in or register to see images

. . . . who's probably on holiday

I pity the poor sod who put in 2 weeks leave for July about 6 months ago

 

[Smug in Boots]

I pity the poor sod who put in 2 weeks leave for July about 6 months ago

 

[rowley]

The Sun alleged the person paid a 17 year old for sexually explicit images, that's a criminal offense. I'm sure we'll find out just how seriously the BBC took the complaint but I'm not ready to condemn them on the basis of the information available now.

Well if they have evidence we'll see.

And as always, it's more than one. This is just another story of the BBC failing in it's responsibilities.

Like an unreformeable junkie; they'll do better next time.

 

[Smug in Boots]

The Sun alleged the person paid a 17 year old for sexually explicit images, that's a criminal offense. I'm sure we'll find out just how seriously the BBC took the complaint but I'm not ready to condemn them on the basis of the information available now.

That's fair enough mate, we can only have a view based on what we see and how we evaluate it.

I'm condemning the BBC because they've learned nothing from previous scandals and cover ups. They featured the Schofield scandal day after day and made a big deal of it despite there being no criminality. Yet, in this case the presenter is in hiding and the BBC seem to be as well.

The name of this presenter will become known but not from the BBC which makes it look like another cover up. I the meantime his fellow presenters are all under suspicion which is unfair imo.

Theres not a lot of openess and honesty here from out State Broadcaster ...

... it smacks of Russia and how they try to manipulate the news.

 

[Row 3]

Well if they have evidence we'll see.

And as always, it's more than one. This is just another story of the BBC failing in it's responsibilities.

Like an unreformeable junkie; they'll do better next time.

More than one what though? Criminal grooming of a minor, or consensual activity between two adults. We just don't know.

 

[rowley]

More than one what though? Criminal grooming of a minor, or consensual activity between two adults. We just don't know.

The suggestion seems to be that the individuals have been harassed, paid and in one case badly abused .

We'll see, perhaps. But why the BBC took so long to even talk to the presenter is a terrible indictment of their approach. As of yesterday , the DG had STILL not even spoken to him.

In the real world, where you are accountable for your actions, that just does not happen.

 

[Smug in Boots]

More than one what though? Criminal grooming of a minor, or consensual activity between two adults. We just don't know.

The problem, for me, is that the BBC were alerted and failed to act for months. The conclusion, for me, is that they'd have done nothing at all if the Sun hadn't published.

If the presenter is totally innocent why suspend him. If it's harmless adult fun they have no right to do that ...

... suspending him is an admission that there's good reason.

 

[Row 3]

The problem, for me, is that the BBC were alerted and failed to act for months. The conclusion, for me, is that they'd have done nothing at all if the Sun hadn't published.

If the presenter is totally innocent why suspend him. If it's harmless adult fun they have no right to do that ...

... suspending him is an admission that there's good reason.

Or a precautionary approach until the facts become clearer. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

 

[Smug in Boots]

Or a precautionary approach until the facts become clearer. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

After two months they should know the facts tbh ...

... in every workplace I've been in they would have HR down at 8.30 the next morning.

https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/tv-licence-fee-evasion-highest/

'Yes let's spend spend spend and criminalise people.'

"With the BBC grappling with a significant loss in revenue and growing public discontent, in several ways – including easier ways to pay, payment plans – and more enforcement officers."

 

[SAFCDRUM]

Bloody hell, they're all at it

Jeremy Vine is shamelessly asking this BBC presenter to reveal himself!!!

What's the matter with these people.

They are all ****ting it in case they get abused in the street.

 

[The Redbaron]

Can't agree there mate.

How can this creature be worth a million a year.

"Zoe Ball, who presents Radio 2's breakfast show, is second on the BBClist, earning between £980,000 and £984,999 for her work on the programme."

How much does that show bring in?

Losing listener hand over fist from audience figures.. Ken Bruce on the otherhand.......soaring now he has left the Corporation or should that be corruption

 

[Smug in Boots]

They are all ****ting it in case they get abused in the street.

'Nonces' are often abused indiscriminately ...

... remember when that paediatrician's house was attacked

"Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "*****phile", it emerged yesterday."

 

[Saf]

Or a precautionary approach until the facts become clearer. I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

You don’t suspend somebody on the back of an allegation unless there’s documentation/evidence to go along with it.

 

[Brainy Dose]

You don’t suspend somebody on the back of an allegation unless there’s documentation/evidence to go along with it.

In a well run organisation that's true.....but...,this is the BBC!

 

[TopCat.]

'Nonces' are often abused indiscriminately ...

... remember when that paediatrician's house was attacked

People also need to understand the difference between a *****phile (nonce) and a sex offender.
Calling a bloke who's set pictures to a 17yo a nonce is incorrect

 

[Smug in Boots]

People also need to understand the difference between a *****phile (nonce) and a sex offender.
Calling a bloke who's set pictures to a 17yo a nonce is incorrect

I know that mate but you only have to look at the Adam Johnson scandal to see how everyone's lumped in together.

In this case there may be no criminality.

But the BBC presents itself at trustworthy, decent and fair ...

... employing 'family men' who are one kind of sex pest or another is hypocritical, especially if they stay employed when they're found out.

Saville and Rolf have queered the pitch tbh.

 

[rowley]

People also need to understand the difference between a *****phile (nonce) and a sex offender.
Calling a bloke who's set pictures to a 17yo a nonce is incorrect

This is more a matter though of the BBC failing to behave correctly. Again. Taking nearly two months to even look at a matter this serious is so far off the pace it is ridiculous.

The Sun will have some evidence, and say they presented some to the BBC. The BBC have shown over decades now that they just cannot be trusted to control itself, despite the whopping salaries paid to the huge battalions of managers, co- ordinators and protocol advisers.

They just want things to either stay under the carpet, or when they are swept out from under it, to go away. They learn nothing.

And as always, only so much of this story is out there.

 

[Smug in Boots]

This is more a matter though of the BBC failing to behave correctly. Again. Taking nearly two months to even look at a matter this serious is so far off the pace it is ridiculous.

The Sun will have some evidence, and say they presented some to the BBC. The BBC have shown over decades now that they just cannot be trusted to control itself, despite the whopping salaries paid to the huge battalions of managers, co- ordinators and protocol advisers.

They just want things to either stay under the carpet, or when they are swept out from under it, to go away. They learn nothing.

And as always, only so much of this story is out there.

The problem is that if you base MOTD on a massively overpaid Gary Lineker you've boxed yourself into a corner. If he errs you'd be inclined to hide it because of the amount you've invested.

These people are put on way too high a pedestal ...

... I get sick of seeing them described as 'national treasures' just for doing pretty ordinary jobs for a long time.

 

[Gil T Azell]

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Gordon Armstrong]

You must log in or register to see images