BBC hiding another Jimmy Saville

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: nickyw

pedos in power everywhere

#in rotters the lot , id fling them into a volcano

exactly the issue.. its why PIE got the massive institutional support it did in the 70s and 80s.. in the 90s i did support work (as a survivor myself) and at the time i was warned that only a handful of chief constables and mps where trustworthy, this was at the height of the satanic panic it resonated with me as to where we are as a society..

Breaking at time of posting.... Met police are saying no crime has been comitted and handed it back to BBC to do their own.
Oh well.....
Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: angelchemuel
Breaking at time of posting.... Met police are saying no crime has been comitted and handed it back to BBC to do their own.
Oh well.....
Rainbows
Jane

(shudders)

Bad example to set. Very bad.

Cheers

Further breaking.... HE's wife, Viccy Flynn has named Huw Edwards as the presenter on his behalf. He is receiving in patient care at hospital for serious mental health issues and will stay there for the forseable future.
Rainbows
Jane

Huw Edwards' wife names him as BBC presenter at centre of scandal

from link in previous post

Statement in full Here is Vicky Flind's statment in full: "In light of the recent reporting regarding the 'BBC Presenter' I am making this statement on behalf of my husband Huw Edwards, after what have been five extremely difficult days for our family. "I am doing this primarily out of concern for his mental well-being and to protect our children. "Huw is suffering from serious mental health issues. As is well documented, he has been treated for severe depression in recent years. "The events of the last few days have greatly worsened matters, he has suffered another serious episode and is now receiving in-patient hospital care where he'll stay for the foreseeable future. "Once well enough to do so, he intends to respond to the stories that have been published. "To be clear Huw was first told that there were allegations being made against him last Thursday. "In the circumstances and given Huw's condition I would like to ask that the privacy of my family and everyone else caught up in these upsetting events is respected. "I know that Huw is deeply sorry that so many colleagues have been impacted by the recent media speculation. We hope this statement will bring that to an end."

I really object to the way the bloke is allowed to hide away citing mental health...I have had actual mental health problems in my time and the only thing this idiot is suffering from is getting caught.

a reply to: SprocketUK

I'm certainly not trying to defend him but he has got a well known history of depression which he has spoken quite openly about in the past.
That no way excuses him and his actions or the BBC's attempts at sweeping it under the carpet.

I do feel genuinely sorry for his wife and children and of course those he was 'involved' with.

And lets put this into perspective; yes he may have been exploiting vulnerable and impressionable teenagers and he has broken the law, but he hasn't been noncing little kids like many.
He's the tip of the iceberg, the 'entertainment' industry, Whitehall and politics in general and other elite and privileged circles are awash with dirty, horrible nonces and sex pests.
And 'The Establishment' does everything within its powers to sweep it under the carpet whenever they can.

a reply to: Freeborn

Reasonable points.

Its funny though how all the wrong us seem to be proper royal family suckups.

HE is in one of the Priory private Clinics.
My ex-husband went into one of those twice. They deal with addictions, not mental health issues.
If they've changed over the years to deal with mental health in last 20+ years, please enlighten me.
Rainbows
Jane

a reply to: Freeborn

They push it under the carpet because if it becomes an issue that could affect the running of the state or the financial viability of the state, it goes into a security file. This over the years must have caused the whole of the top echelons to be compromised, which has undermined the democratic process. The outcome of this is terminal,a cul de sac with no way out.

a reply to: angelchemuel
So, he wasn't sectioned then? Or maybe he was and then 'outsourced'?

Must admit, I laughed when I heard he'd had an episode, was institutionalised and his wife disclosing his identity. If he was sectioned and it was her who instigate this with the police, proverbial kick in the nuts!

originally posted by: Freeborn
And lets put this into perspective; yes he may have been exploiting vulnerable and impressionable teenagers and he has broken the law, but he hasn't been noncing little kids like many.

Just to be exact. And myself not being privy to more information than anyone else in this thread, do we actually know the extent of said person's acts..? Or is that detail based on what we don't know?

a reply to: Consumer

Or is that detail based on what we don't know?

Based on the information that is available.
What else could it be based on?

originally posted by: Freeborn
Based on the information that is available.
What else could it be based on?

In other words, as far as we currently know. Ok.

a reply to: teapot

He can be sectioned directly into the Priory. No need for NHS first and then referal/outsourced. The Priory's (several around UK) are private clinics. My husband (second time he fell off the wagon), was given option to sign himself in or he would be sectioned, so he self refered, there are 'legality' consequences if you are sectioned rather than self-referred. I haven't seen anything saying HE was sectioned, but I could have missed something.
I'm guessing he's been treated for sexual addiction. With addiction comes depression.
Rainbows
Jane

a reply to: angelchemuel

Can you get sectioned for sexual addiction?

I suppose if an individual's sexual behavior poses a significant risk to themselves or others, it may lead to involuntary hospitalisation.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Ive engaged my brain long ago and cancelled my license fees because Im not paying a corporation full of criminals

maybe you should do the same instead of drinking their kool aid.

I don't have a TV licence either - nor do I watch anything on BBC, not even programmes that I appear in!

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Whats a ""TV licence""?

The BBC's answer would have to be mere extortion.

Aka the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through threats.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

well good for you

I assume you are just playing devils advocate here by asking why they should be held accountable for the actions of their staff.

not sure why you'd defend a corporation who have more than dirty hands

it's funny how that works eh when its people like you and me we are held accountable and your employer gets bad press and potentially even forced into closure because they had a bad employee.
yet somehow when they commit crimes or are guilty of wrong they simply wash their hands of it and then write articles and new stories stating they are against such actions and their policies prevent any such behavior from happening and carry on as if it never happened

I mean how many times can they be guilty of scandals and crimes etc before they are forced to disband

I mean like the same with political parties, they throw the people under the bus when they get caught , yet the party continues, despite the fact they all knew about the wrong doing and crimes and they get of scot free

#in pathetic the state of the UK
crime does pay , and its all fair game until you have to announce yer a wrong un then seek medical help
but for those in celeb /politics world they never see the inside of a cell

one rule for us another for them

edit: have you appeared in anything that would be fun to watch ?
always lookin for decent tv , but if its bbc then i will not watch it

on principle