Top Gear producer to sue Clarkson
Discussion
Countdown said:
Einion Yrth said:
And I'd probably think you were mummy's precious little soldier, too.
So what would YOU do if your boss called you a 
, punched you in the mouth, and swore at you in front of colleagues? Laugh it off?It's simple really.
If you get assaulted by a poor nobody, you hit him back and/or move on.
If you get assaulted by a rich bloke and lose your job you sue him and the BBC.
If he hasn't got grounds a court will toss it to the kerb. If not and he gets ££££, so what.
Really, why do internet strangers give a tug??
If you get assaulted by a poor nobody, you hit him back and/or move on.
If you get assaulted by a rich bloke and lose your job you sue him and the BBC.
If he hasn't got grounds a court will toss it to the kerb. If not and he gets ££££, so what.
Really, why do internet strangers give a tug??
DonkeyApple said:
Of course. But this chap is attempting to claim that while he was happy to be paid as a senior member of staff on a show that regularly and clearly deliberately courted controversy by pushing the modern boundaries of acceptability in terms of 'racism' he isn't happy to have it pointed at him personally.
Of all the things he has an absolute right to be suing over, this one matter seems to be the element that he has no right whatsoever to complain about given his complicit actions of the past.
Interesting thought except he wasn't the executive producer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_WilmanOf all the things he has an absolute right to be suing over, this one matter seems to be the element that he has no right whatsoever to complain about given his complicit actions of the past.
'Andrew "Andy" Wilman (born 16 August 1962) is an English television producer who is best known as the former executive producer of the Top Gear show, from 2002 to 2015. He was responsible for much of the show's style and humour, along with Jeremy Clarkson. He has also presented segments of the original Top Gear. He's primarily responsible for the creation of The Stig. Wilman and Clarkson were both educated at Repton School'.
The key people responsible for the 'humour' and Format according to Wiki is Andy Wilman and Jeremy Clarkson so you may not be wholly correct
Edited by Toaster on Sunday 15th November 21:57
Toaster said:
DonkeyApple said:
Of course. But this chap is attempting to claim that while he was happy to be paid as a senior member of staff on a show that regularly and clearly deliberately courted controversy by pushing the modern boundaries of acceptability in terms of 'racism' he isn't happy to have it pointed at him personally.
Of all the things he has an absolute right to be suing over, this one matter seems to be the element that he has no right whatsoever to complain about given his complicit actions of the past.
Interesting thought except he wasn't the executive producer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_WilmanOf all the things he has an absolute right to be suing over, this one matter seems to be the element that he has no right whatsoever to complain about given his complicit actions of the past.
'Andrew "Andy" Wilman (born 16 August 1962) is an English television producer who is best known as the former executive producer of the Top Gear show, from 2002 to 2015. He was responsible for much of the show's style and humour, along with Jeremy Clarkson. He has also presented segments of the original Top Gear. He's primarily responsible for the creation of The Stig. Wilman and Clarkson were both educated at Repton School'.
The key people responsible for the 'humour' and Format according to Wiki is Andy Wilman and Jeremy Clarkson so you may not be wholly correct
Edited by Toaster on Sunday 15th November 21:57
are arguably far more offensive. As I mentioned in earlier posts, he has every right to do what he is doing. He was assaulted and if he can show that his future career and income have been negatively effected as a result then he should win but just that of all the arguments he has chosen the weakest yet in reality, from a legal standpoint and considering Clarkson's new employer and that the marketing has begun I suspect this route and timing has been chosen by smart layers to ensure the best and quickest result.
It's all a bit of a homofest. A thirty minute argument, having to drive yourself to hospital because no one else thought the split lip to be of any great issue and then whining about a racial slur, especially as an Irishman. But, the fact remains you simply can't punch someone in the workplace and JC will have to do what it takes to make a problem of his own making go away.
Scuffers said:
Blakewater said:
Slope is a derogatory term for someone of black African origin.
err... no it's not.it's Asian's (Asian/Vietnamese/etc), not Africans.
if your going to pick up on something like this, please try and get it right.
It all boils down to lawyers advertising themselves by seeing how big a name or organisation they can bring down.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/02/jerem...
Scuffers said:
Eh?
That link does not claim slope is referring to Africans.
I'm not trying to prove it does. I read that it did, but looking into it further it doesn't. Well done. It's not a particularly well known phrase in this country. That link does not claim slope is referring to Africans.
There are plenty of programmes on television that are far more detrimental to society and Top Gear generally aims to show the countries it visits in a positive light, even if a bunch of middle aged ex public school blokes make jokes that are a little out of touch.
Is it really worth a million pounds to someone? How can a financial value be put on it? Why try to bring down the whole show by writing to ambassadors of countries all around the world? Why don't we ask the ambassador for the USA why The Simpsons is so much more blatantly racist?
It's simply because a bunch of lawyers know that bringing down the BBC's most popular and profitable programme will do their image good.
Scuffers said:
being called Irish?
He was allegedly called "a lazy Irish c**t" by Clarkson and then punched in the face.Under UK law, calling someone "a lazy c**t" is looked on as abuse. Calling someone " a lazy Irish c**t" is looked on as racial abuse. You may not think there is much of an issue adding the nationality bit to the abusive language but the law thinks differently.
Eric Mc said:
He was allegedly called "a lazy Irish c**t" by Clarkson and then punched in the face.
Under UK law, calling someone "a lazy c**t" is looked on as abuse. Calling someone " a lazy Irish c**t" is looked on as racial abuse. You may not think there is much of an issue adding the nationality bit to the abusive language but the law thinks differently.
then the law is dumb/stupid.Under UK law, calling someone "a lazy c**t" is looked on as abuse. Calling someone " a lazy Irish c**t" is looked on as racial abuse. You may not think there is much of an issue adding the nationality bit to the abusive language but the law thinks differently.
calling somebody Irish is not being racist, any more than calling English, Scottish or Welsh is.
How many times have we all been called a lazy c**t? is that racist too?
Get f**king real, this is no more than a lame attempt to get money, from both Clarkson and the BBC, are you suggesting the BBC is there to fund this muppet (after all, they are still paying him a salary!)
My guess is that no part of the BBC wants him working for them, hence where we are now (and to be fair, who would want to employ a producer to work with people known to be 'difficult' with his record?)
Look, you can all jump up and down about how bad Clarkson was to punch him, (and I am not suggesting it was right), but to ignore the situation that lead to this would be somewhat stupid.
He has effectively made himself un-employable as a producer.
Blakewater said:
So, who was Ms Guha's million pounds going to go to then?
It all boils down to lawyers advertising themselves by seeing how big a name or organisation they can bring down.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/02/jerem...
Lawrence Davies sounds like the kid at school that'd tell on the other boys for wearing non-uniform socks.It all boils down to lawyers advertising themselves by seeing how big a name or organisation they can bring down.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/02/jerem...
Scuffers said:
Eric Mc said:
He was allegedly called "a lazy Irish c**t" by Clarkson and then punched in the face.
Under UK law, calling someone "a lazy c**t" is looked on as abuse. Calling someone " a lazy Irish c**t" is looked on as racial abuse. You may not think there is much of an issue adding the nationality bit to the abusive language but the law thinks differently.
then the law is dumb/stupid.Under UK law, calling someone "a lazy c**t" is looked on as abuse. Calling someone " a lazy Irish c**t" is looked on as racial abuse. You may not think there is much of an issue adding the nationality bit to the abusive language but the law thinks differently.
calling somebody Irish is not being racist, any more than calling English, Scottish or Welsh is.
How many times have we all been called a lazy c**t? is that racist too?
Get f**king real, this is no more than a lame attempt to get money, from both Clarkson and the BBC, are you suggesting the BBC is there to fund this muppet (after all, they are still paying him a salary!)
My guess is that no part of the BBC wants him working for them, hence where we are now (and to be fair, who would want to employ a producer to work with people known to be 'difficult' with his record?)
Look, you can all jump up and down about how bad Clarkson was to punch him, (and I am not suggesting it was right), but to ignore the situation that lead to this would be somewhat stupid.
He has effectively made himself un-employable as a producer.
The subject of the open salvo is more likely to have been selected for its better ability to obtain as swift and beneficial settlement as possible rather than being a reflection of the actual, relevant offence.
DonkeyApple said:
One could also argue that he has effectively been made un-employable as a producer by someone else. Hence now the expectation that that person or people make up the future income shortfall that the victim will endure.
The subject of the open salvo is more likely to have been selected for its better ability to obtain as swift and beneficial settlement as possible rather than being a reflection of the actual, relevant offence.
let me draw a parallel.The subject of the open salvo is more likely to have been selected for its better ability to obtain as swift and beneficial settlement as possible rather than being a reflection of the actual, relevant offence.
I have a friend who's son is a prison officer.
the stories he tells of the abuse they have to put up with every day makes this spat look so trivial.
He tells of days when they have every abuse you can imagine thrown at then, they are often on the ends of being physically attacked, etc etc.
if a prisoner call's him a black c**t or n*gger, does he have a claim against them for racial abuse?
No, it's part of his job, yes it's not right, but welcome to the real world.
Tymon had been the job long enough to know what was expected of him, and the environment, he f**ked up, Clarkson went off on one, he got punched, no, it's not right, but you cannot escape the reality of how the situation arrived and what his job was.
Now, who else is going to employ him to do the same job with that on his record?
Suing the BBC is only going to make getting a job that much harder.
I wonder if in a quiet moment, he wishes he had acted differently at the time?
Scuffers said:
walm said:
The prisoners aren't his boss.
It's completely different.
Sorry, Clarkson was not his boss either.It's completely different.
He is a BBC employee, Clarkson is not.
His line manager is not Clarkson
Clarkson asked him to do stuff.
"Boss" doesn't exclusively mean line manager.
Your analogy is utterly inappropriate.
It is not "part of the job" to be verbally and physically abused by Clarkson.
Scuffers said:
walm said:
The prisoners aren't his boss.
It's completely different.
Sorry, Clarkson was not his boss either.It's completely different.
He is a BBC employee, Clarkson is not.
His line manager is not Clarkson
If I look at my own career, as a relationship manager, glorified salesman, I will always be paid far more than much more senior members of staff in my industry. In fact, most of the time the role will be paying more than the Directors are taking home. It does draw relevant parallels to that of a frontman for a TV show in this regard. In the paper hierarchy of the firm I would barely feature as there will be many people technically more senior but the fiscal hierarchy is a different matter, it places you well above all those around you and what comes with that is an obvious expectation of behaviour. What someone more senior than me can get away with at the Christmas party or in public is very different to how I am expected to behave and will be tolerated.
There will obviously have been the same expectation of the highly paid and central figure of Clarkson and this is something that he has openly admitted.
DonkeyApple said:
Scuffers said:
walm said:
The prisoners aren't his boss.
It's completely different.
Sorry, Clarkson was not his boss either.It's completely different.
He is a BBC employee, Clarkson is not.
His line manager is not Clarkson
If I look at my own career, as a relationship manager, glorified salesman, I will always be paid far more than much more senior members of staff in my industry. In fact, most of the time the role will be paying more than the Directors are taking home. It does draw relevant parallels to that of a frontman for a TV show in this regard. In the paper hierarchy of the firm I would barely feature as there will be many people technically more senior but the fiscal hierarchy is a different matter, it places you well above all those around you and what comes with that is an obvious expectation of behaviour. What someone more senior than me can get away with at the Christmas party or in public is very different to how I am expected to behave and will be tolerated.
There will obviously have been the same expectation of the highly paid and central figure of Clarkson and this is something that he has openly admitted.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff