Jump to content

The Moral Maze - Age of Consent


Seat68

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

I’m not sure why the BBC bother trying to keep the name secret. It’ll be out within a couple of days after dozens of presenters have been falsely accused. 

Because it is absolutely the correct course of action. Legally and morally at this stage. They’d get sued for a huge figure if they were he ones to release the name

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think on the balance of probabilities, pretty much any crime is more likely to have been committed by a male.

That’s genuine actual crime, not just liking shit music or stopping in narrow shop doorways to stare in to your bag.

I shall use as my evidence: the prison population including sex offenders.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I think on the balance of probabilities, pretty much any crime is more likely to have been committed by a male.

That’s genuine actual crime, not just liking shit music or stopping in narrow shop doorways to stare in to your bag.

I shall use as my evidence: the prison population including sex offenders.

99% of sex offenders are male.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

99% of sex offenders are male.  

The latest stats I can find on a quick search are from the ONS / MoJ for 2017.

Perps of sexual offences of all types in 2017: 

Male 10,974

Female 186

 

I’m sticking my money on it being a male.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

Because it is absolutely the correct course of action. Legally and morally at this stage. They’d get sued for a huge figure if they were he ones to release the name

Who would sue them? They’ve suspended someone so I’m not sure what they gain by not saying who it is when it’ll obviously be public knowledge very soon. 
The speculation will be very damaging to their other presenters.

They could even say “An x year old presenter has been suspended whilst we conduct an investigation” like the police do when they arrest a footballer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a famous male adult film actor on a podcast a while back and he said he had an onlyfans page that was making a lot of money. There was a bit of a surprise at that because they (the presenters) didn’t think there were that many women paying for cock-pics and he said it’s true, it’s mainly gay men that subscribe to his page.

Edited by Genie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Genie said:

Who would sue them? They’ve suspended someone so I’m not sure what they gain by not saying who it is when it’ll obviously be public knowledge very soon. 
The speculation will be very damaging to their other presenters.

They could even say “An x year old presenter has been suspended whilst we conduct an investigation” like the police do when they arrest a footballer. 

The person that they suspended. What happens if this is all a load of bollocks, which quite frankly, right now it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bickster said:

The person that they suspended. What happens if this is all a load of bollocks, which quite frankly, right now it is.

Then he’ll go back to work I assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

There was a famous male adult film actor on a podcast a while back and he said he had an onlyfans page that was making a lot of money. Their was a bit of a surprise at that because they (the presenters) didn’t think there were that many women paying for cock-pics and he said it’s true, it’s mainly gay men that subscribe to his page.

Danny D on jaackmates pod?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Genie said:

Then he’ll go back to work I assume.

It wouldn’t be an employment tribunal

The BBC would be held responsible for he torrent of hate that would be directed towards said individual whose life would be changed permanently by the accusation

The BBC would in all likelihood settle out of court for a massive sum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bickster said:

It wouldn’t be an employment tribunal

The BBC would be held responsible for he torrent of hate that would be directed towards said individual whose life would be changed permanently by the accusation

The BBC would in all likelihood settle out of court for a massive sum.

What about other presenters falsely accused and abused on social media because the BBC didn’t rule them out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Genie said:

Then he’ll go back to work I assume.

It sticks for a while but blows over eventually. Sir Cliff Richard seems to be doing alright despite his wrestle with infamy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Genie said:

What about other presenters falsely accused and abused on social media because the BBC didn’t rule them out?

Hopefully they'll sue the idiots who named them. There is talk that Lineker, Rylan and a few others are getting together to do just that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bickster said:

Hopefully they'll sue the idiots who named them. There is talk that Lineker, Rylan and a few others are getting together to do just that

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â