By now you’ve been swept up in the massive mind boggling mystery that is the not so clandestine investigation by the beloved BBC into one of its treasured presenters accused of buying indecent images from a business savvy seventeen year old. We’ve all been swept away with it, it’s been impossible to ignore. There is nothing wrong with that. We’re automatically attuned to try and solve questions without answers and when a riddle pops into our dull online world, we set about trying to solve it. We want to be the first Columbo to shout, “and another thing!” We want to be heralded for our wisdom, for spotting the nonce before anyone else, for having incredible pedo hunting skills. It’s in our DNA. It’s a little of trying to protect our young along with a smattering of fighting an injustice as well as a huge dollop of discovering life’s greatest mysteries. The Sun newspaper knows this, hence the blurred silhouette with a huge Ariel bold question mark on the front page almost every day this week. They’ve given us a sordid secret to uncover and the first to do that will feel a few seconds of immense satisfaction as they reveal the target before the inferior general public.
We All Love a Witch Hunt
We’re all guilty of this, it’s the little bit of narcissism in every single one of us and usually there’s no harm in it. Murder mysteries, unsolved true crimes, guessing how many sweets are in the jar, all harmless. This though, this is someone’s career, someones life. The witch hunt has started before the name has been revealed and, get this, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.
This is what we know:
The parents of a person who used to be seventeen (as we all were) went INTO a BBC building to complain that their child had SOLD indecent images to a BBC Presenter.
These parents now claim that it’s this solitary transaction of, allegedly, £35,000 (I do wonder if the child or parents paid tax on that), that prompted said child to develop a crack addict. (Here’s a thought – and it is JUST MY OPINION – if someone is selling indecent images for thousands of pounds, they already have a habit that needs financing, be it shopping, gambling, or crack).
The seventeen year old, who is no longer seventeen, says, through a solicitor, that it’s all rubbish. All of it.
The parents are unreachable but then surface again demanding the presenter be taken off air.
The BBC launch an investigation.
The police take over.
There is, to date, no evidence. No screenshots of messages, no bank statements showing transactions, it is all hearsay. All of it. Maybe this will be revealed later but you would have thought, by now, with all of these investigative resources, that some evidence must exist.
The public go into a frenzy, memes are created. Many are hilarious and we forget that behind this is a man, a real human being whose world is falling apart right now as he got a bit horny and bought images from someone selling them, who was over the age of consent.
Many compare this to Jimmy Saville, the man who physically assaulted hundreds of terminally ill children while abusing many more. Those with a little more common sense compare it to the Cliff Richard debacle, where many pointed the finger without a shred of evidence, where Cliff Richard was then found to be squeaky clean.
Innocent Until Proven Guilty
Whichever side of the fence you sit on it’s clear this topic has got the public all riled up. We don’t like to think of a wolf in sheep’s clothing hiding in one of our greatest British institutions. We don’t want a repeat of Rolf Harris, Gary Glitter and all the other disgusting little men who bullied children into sexual favours. We don’t. Yet we must practice caution. This man’s life matters too. Especially while he is innocent, because he is, right now, innocent. In this country we believe in INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY and he has not been proven guilty.
An Uncomfortable Question for You!
Now I have a question that may make you uncomfortable. If you’re one of the ones with a pitchfork hunting this man down, ready to burn him Wicker Man style, answer me this. How old were the actors in the last porn movie you watched? Can you tell me their ages, with conviction? Did you do your due diligence before getting your rocks off, did you check their dates of birth? Of course, you know they’re over the age of consent, they wouldn’t be acting if they weren’t, but how far over the age of consent? A year? two years? Three? When is it acceptable?
In my opinion, and this is just my opinion, this whole thing reeks of compensation. The parents are looking to profit from their child’s decline into crack addict. I may be wrong, and if I am I will apologise for having an opinion different to the norm but until then, let’s leave this poor man alone.
Disclaimer: Any type of child abuse is unacceptable. This rant is not disputing that. If found guilty of child sex abuse this person deserves the correct punishment and more. Sexual abuse and pedophilia is NOT ok and never will be. This post is simply stating that there is no evidence and the BBC presenter in question should be allowed anonymity and a fair trial before his life is ruined beyond repair.
