Who do you think it is.

[Bee]

Named here. Might as well be anybody as I wouldn't know any of them anyway

https://pkbnews.in/fact-check-is-bbc-pr ... legations/

Bee

[paulja]

Named here. Might as well be anybody as I wouldn't know any of them anyway

https://pkbnews.in/fact-check-is-bbc-pr ... legations/

Bee

And therin is one of the reasons why the internet is unreliable and why the BBC should name him and say that does not mean guilty.

Many websites have a different name in the frame.

Speculation will continue until the BBC does name him. But if innocent mud will stick.

[Lincoln45]

blob.jpg (72.39 KiB) Viewed 1644 times

[Lincoln45]

Interesting to see how much like rats some of these presenters are clamouring for this person to to be named, regardless of the law, even going so far as dropping big hints on air that maybe some MP should name him using Parliamentary Privileges. They are very quick to turn on their own.

[paulja]

Interesting to see how much like rats some of these presenters are clamouring for this person to to be named, regardless of the law, even going so far as dropping big hints on air that maybe some MP should name him using Parliamentary Privileges. They are very quick to turn on their own.

But it is for a good reason.
Because he will not own up, many are being dragged into it with all the speculation and all the negatives that come with it, they all know who it is yet it is their reputations are being tarnished.

[Lincoln45]

They don't give a toss about reputations apart from their own. The ones doing all the shouting, we know its not them as they are still on air. It seems to be a bit more of lets keep my name in the headlines.

[paulja]

They don't give a toss about reputations apart from their own. The ones doing all the shouting, we know its not them as they are still on air. It seems to be a bit more of lets keep my name in the headlines.

If there was a paedophile on here ,I am sure you, like me, and all the innocent ones, would want the guilty one named instead of it being thought it could be you, me or any of the innocent ones.

Why switch it to those saying the accused should admit who it is instead of allowing his associatessnd and his employer to be tarnished.

[Lincoln45]

Everybody is entitled to due process as distasteful as it may seem

As for the BBC being tarnished, that was done many years ago

[paulja]

Everybody is entitled to due process as distasteful as it may seem

Due process doesn't stop the accused showing some concern or some dignity by coming out to prevent further speculation.

And I am not sure he cannot be named as at the moment, the BBC has paused its investigation and the police have said at the moment there is no investigation.

GN

[Lincoln45]

The police are looking at it to see if any criminality is involved, which is why they have asked the BBC to suspend their investigation. If and when they deduce that their is criminality involved then a full investigation will take place, and until that person is charged, then they cannot be named.
Ever thought why the Sun hasn't plastered his name all over the front page