Phillip Schofield gone

[Grumps.]

What The Deuces said:

Grumps. said:

What The Deuces said:

markiii said:

I'd say it's been blown up because of his brother

I’d say is because he appears to be a grooming nonce

Any actual evidence of the grooming?

Plenty of things that need to be verified yes. Hence I used the word ‘appears’.

If you think everything looks fine and nothing needs looking into then you’re part of the problem not the solution.

Riiiiiiiiiight.

[What The Deuces]

Grumps. said:

Riiiiiiiiiight.

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12) in a position of authority and ended up fking him as soon as he was of a legal age whilst getting him a job where he works.

ITV are also alleged to have paid the lad off to keep quiet.

How does that not need a formal independent investigation?

[Grumps.]

What The Deuces said:

Grumps. said:

Riiiiiiiiiight.

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12) in a position of authority and ended up fking him as soon as he was of a legal age whilst getting him a job where he works.

ITV are also alleged to have paid the lad off to keep quiet.

How does that not need a formal independent investigation?

Because as it stands, nothing illegal happened.

[Wacky Racer]

M4cruiser said:

Just airing my opinion - having an affair at work isn't that bad. (Age and gender of the "other" person is just personal choice, and I wouldn't judge on that.)
Trying to keep it under wraps is normal. What's the problem?

This has been blown up out of proportion as a news story, just because he's "become" gay recently.
Last night's news had this as a lead story, then later moved on to reporting that hundreds are killed in a train crash. That's the sense of proportion shown by the media.

Anyway, my opinion for what it's worth.

I agree, He's been a fool, but anyone would think he's the Yorkshire Ripper, Thousands of people tell lies and cheat on their partners/wives/husband every year.

He will be very lucky to come back from this.

Leave him alone now, unless he has broken the law.

[What The Deuces]

Grumps. said:

What The Deuces said:

Grumps. said:

Riiiiiiiiiight.

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12) in a position of authority and ended up fking him as soon as he was of a legal age whilst getting him a job where he works.

ITV are also alleged to have paid the lad off to keep quiet.

How does that not need a formal independent investigation?

Because as it stands, nothing illegal happened.

Nobody knows yet. It appears it may have though. You do understand ‘abuse of power’ don’t you? Age is irrelevant btw

[DodgyGeezer]

What The Deuces said:

Grumps. said:

What The Deuces said:

Grumps. said:

Riiiiiiiiiight.

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12) in a position of authority and ended up fking him as soon as he was of a legal age whilst getting him a job where he works.

ITV are also alleged to have paid the lad off to keep quiet.

How does that not need a formal independent investigation?

Because as it stands, nothing illegal happened.

Nobody knows yet. It appears it may have though. You do understand ‘abuse of power’ don’t you? Age is irrelevant btw

indeed at the very least it's an abuse of power (or could be seen as such). Now I'm not saying he's like Weinstein but one (of the many) problems there was "...sleep with me and you'll get the part..." now I'd imagine that it's a cast-iron certainty that ps didn't utter that phrase but it is somewhat distasteful and needs to be looked at.

[markiii]

What The Deuces said:

markiii said:

I'd say it's been blown up because of his brother

I’d say is because he appears to be a grooming nonce

No one cared before the brother got sent down

[What The Deuces]

markiii said:

What The Deuces said:

markiii said:

I'd say it's been blown up because of his brother

I’d say is because he appears to be a grooming nonce

No one cared before the brother got sent down

Given the alleged gagging orders and payoffs that have taken place I’d say plenty of people cared or were denied the chance to care.

[Lucas Ayde]

markiii said:

No one cared before the brother got sent down

The whole over-the-top 'Phil comes out' act a while back was a distraction to cover for the current scandal, which was about to break at the time. The business with his brother just stirred things up and meant that the story surfaced at last.

The media are complicit in the sordid story - they would have known about the scandal back then but the nicely packaged narrative of stunning and brave Phil finally coming out (with scores of celebs supporting him) was a nice PC-friendly narrative that they could run with and generate views/clicks for weeks and of course, they could always get back to the scandal at a future date for more views and clicks .. which recent events with his brother have facilitated as they put him in the limelight. Build them up and then pull them down is the standard business model of the entertainment media.

[eldar]

What The Deuces said:

Plenty of things that need to be verified yes. Hence I used the word ‘appears’.

If you think everything looks fine and nothing needs looking into then you’re part of the problem not the solution.

Be explicit. Exactly what needs to br verified, and by whom.

The rumour that you, personally it appears to some, assisted Jimmy Savile in his child buggering activities also needs verification, yes?

Its very easy to throw st, chimp like. Now you prove you aren't a nonce.

[What The Deuces]

eldar said:

What The Deuces said:

Plenty of things that need to be verified yes. Hence I used the word ‘appears’.

If you think everything looks fine and nothing needs looking into then you’re part of the problem not the solution.

Be explicit. Exactly what needs to br verified, and by whom.

The rumour that you, personally it appears to some, assisted Jimmy Savile in his child buggering activities also needs verification, yes?

Its very easy to throw st, chimp like. Now you prove you aren't a nonce.

If you can’t work out what then you’re too stupid to discuss it with.

I’ve spelled it out explicitly above already anyway

[eldar]

What The Deuces said:

eldar said:

What The Deuces said:

Plenty of things that need to be verified yes. Hence I used the word ‘appears’.

If you think everything looks fine and nothing needs looking into then you’re part of the problem not the solution.

Be explicit. Exactly what needs to br verified, and by whom.

The rumour that you, personally it appears to some, assisted Jimmy Savile in his child buggering activities also needs verification, yes?

Its very easy to throw st, chimp like. Now you prove you aren't a nonce.

If you can’t work out what then you’re too stupid to discuss it with.

I’ve spelled it out explicitly above already anyway

No answer, then. Wont deny being a peadophile. All i need to know Jimmy/Rolf.

[LordFlathead]

Well on the flipside.. at least that's the end of the painful "We bum any car" ads

[Grumps.]

Looks like Holly is returning to the show tomorrow morning to give an ‘emotional statement’.

And she has obviously also been approached by BBC to work for them, although I suppose that was inevitable.

[48k]

What The Deuces said:

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12)

What's your source / evidence of that?

[anonymous-user]

eldar said:

pocketspring said:

Prince Andrew had a car crash interview and so did Schofield. Nice try though....

If you say so. Very witty, joining the pile on.

I did say so, it's there in type. There's nothing "witty" about what I said. You can put the shovel down now, your hole is big enough as it is.

[The Gauge]

48k said:

What The Deuces said:

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12)

What's your source / evidence of that?

PS has admitted to meeting and knowing him as a child. There’s a Jack Jones TV video where he approaches PS in a restaurant where he is sat at a table with the child.

PS then got him a job on the show but says nothing happened sexually between them until then. However OS has already proven that he is a liar so his account isn’t exactly being taken as gospel.

Add to that his brother has been convicted plus the rumours of injunctions and pay offs and you can begin to see why there are so many questions and why this is a news story

Edited by The Gauge on Sunday 4th June 08:01

[Castrol for a knave]

48k said:

What The Deuces said:

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12)

What's your source / evidence of that?

He hasn't got any. Writing the word "fact" does not make it so.

Most normal, balanced people are waiting for the evidence, which seems to be lacking at the moment.

Man's dad's dog's brother told Dan Wotton is not considered evidence.

[Randy Winkman]

Clarkson not happy with coverage of Schofield issue.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/t...

[48k]

The Gauge said:

48k said:

What The Deuces said:

The very basic facts are he first me this kid as a pre teen (12)

What's your source / evidence of that?

PS has admitted to meeting and knowing him as a child. There’s a Jack Jones TV video where he approaches PS in a restaurant where he is sat at a table with the child.

Edited by The Gauge on Sunday 4th June 08:01

You say "child" but the Jack Jones video to which you are referring was from March 2015. The lad was born in 1996 meaning he was 18 or 19 in that video. So actually an adult.

The press have stated he met the lad when he was 15, and so far that seems to be the only provable fact.

He's a lad that looks young for his age and people seem to be jumping on the drama school photo where someone said "he looks about 11" and all of a sudden it's PS met the lad when he was 11.

So my question still stands - you are stating as fact he met the lad when he was 12 I'm just asking for the evidence because so far I haven't seen any.