Popular Presenter Paid Teen For Her Pics? All About The BBC Sex Scandal Everyone Is Talking About

The BBC suspended one of its male presenters on Sunday after he was accused of spending ?35,000 buying explicit images from a young person who spent the money on crack cocaine.

Their interactions allegedly began when the young person was 17 years old, meaning the BBC star may have been commissioning child sexual abuse images, a serious criminal offence. However, if no explicit photos were exchanged until the young person turned 18, then that is likely to be within the law.

The Sun anonymously quoted the young person's 'mother'

Everything that has been made public so far relies on reporting by the Sun, which anonymously quoted the mother of the young person. She told the newspaper that her child, now 20, had shown her an online bank statement with multiple deposits from the BBC presenter: "There were huge sums, hundreds, or thousands of pounds at a time. One time he had sent ?5,000 in one lump. The money had been in exchange for sexually explicit photographs of my child."

The mother said the BBC star requested "performances" from her child, who would "get their bits out" for him before spending the funds on drugs. "I blame this BBC man for destroying my child's life," she said. "Taking my child's innocence and handing over the money for crack cocaine that could kill my child."

However, the teenager at the centre of the BBC presenter scandal has said nothing inappropriate or unlawful happened, with the unnamed star accused of paying them ?35,000 for sexually explicit images. They said the allegations published in The Sun were "rubbish" in a letter issued by their lawyer to the broadcaster.

The claim comes hours after the Metropolitan Police confirmed: "there is no investigation at this time".

the-sun

Presenter not named yet

The Sun and multiple other news outlets know the identity of the BBC presenter accused of wrongdoing but have so far declined to publish his name. Sources at the tabloid cited the UK's increasingly strong privacy laws, along with other legal concerns about linking an individual to such damaging allegations. There is not believed to be any court injunction banning the disclosure of the name.

What's happening right now?

There are now four separate allegations against the household-name TV personality, including breaking lockdown rules and sending threatening messages to a person in their early twenties who he met on a dating app.

A 23-year-old has claimed the unnamed presenter broke lockdown rules to meet them during the pandemic in February 2021, according to The Sun.

Separately, a 17-year-old alleged that they were following the star on Instagram when he messaged them, using love hearts and kisses, reported The Sun on Tuesday.

In a different set of allegations, BBC News reported on Tuesday that a person in their early 20s has claimed they were sent threatening messages by the unnamed man.

Another TV presenter, Jeremy Vine, said the accused presenter "needs to come forward", saying, "the longer he leaves it the worse it will be for him".

The Sun

What does the law say?

Myles Jackman, who has represented individuals accused of similar crimes, said possessing images of a child undertaking sexual acts had a starting sentence of 26 weeks in prison. The sentence could increase substantially if they are found to have shared those images.

Although the age of consent for sexual activity in England and Wales is 16 years old, the law on indecent images treats all under-18s as children, he said: "The Protection of Children Act 1978 prohibits any production, possession, or distribution of images of a sexual nature of children ¨C and that means under the age of 18."

International Law

How will it be judged?

Issues that a judge would take into account include the vulnerability of the child depicted, the number of images possessed, abuse of trust, and whether the child appeared to be intoxicated or drunk.

Jackman said securing a suspended sentence ¨C and staying out of prison ¨C could come down to convincing a judge that this was a one-off: "Quantity becomes important. Anything over around 50 images is generally considered a large amount. Based on the possession of a small quantity of category-B images, they are at risk of prison. The only thing they will have going for them is good character."

For more on news and current affairs from around the world, please visit Indiatimes News.