Schofield
 

I am confused.

Why is this a scandal? Is he a peodophile (Phil, I know about his brother)?

Was his partner underage?

Why are the partner's photos blurred?

Why is the partner's name secret?

Is there a double injunction?

Most of the time, I use NordVPN and of course, I can see photos and the name of the parner, his new job etc

BTW I do not watch TV, and this occupies acres of news

Re: Schofield
 

I don’t know. He and Holly Wobbly were supposedly best buds and fronted a powerhouse TV show well known and loved by many (not me as it happens). Them falling out is a tabloid story in itself. Mostly it seems said tabloids have been wanting to hang him out to dry over this for years but the agency he was with is very influential and rather good at keeping scandal off the front pages where it involves any of its high-profile clients. They have parted ways and it is now open season on Phil.

He was obviously very chummy with this young protege long before the boy became a man, and has been forced to make clear that nothing sexual occurred before said boy became a man. But the tabloids love any insinuation of sexual impropriety and have gone at it with enthusiasm.

It’s not at all hard to see the name and photos of the young man. He’s all over Twitter, regardless of whatever self-censorship the British press may have adopted. But I still don’t know who he is, nor do I really care.

Re: Schofield
 

It's tabloid crap, which makes it strange some of the more serious newspapers have also led with it. Probably just to distract from the real issues atm and the dire state the country is in. Plus a bit of homophobia always goes down well with the masses.

Re: Schofield
 

I’m more inclined to believe the media apparatus have been turning a blind eye, as it often does, when one of the establishment behaves in a way that’s beneath normal standards. That’s not to say he did anything illegal, but ITV’s pretence they didn’t know or have suspicions isn’t fooling anyone.

Re: Schofield
 

Does this really matter?

Re: Schofield
 

Nope

Re: Schofield
 

It could matter, for Schofield, if it turns out to be true that he has known this young man from a very early age. 12 yrs old allegedly. The accusation is that Schofield essentially groomed the young man. Now there is no accusation of any underage sexual activity, but there is certainly a power dynamic. Schofield being the person in position of power and wielding influence, enough to get this young man a job and screen tests on This Morning.

The implications being, if this was a man in his late 50’s doing this with a 16yr old girl, well ……say no more.

It’s also alleged that it is the affair with this teenager, as he would have been a few years ago, that forced Schofield to come out, of which he was lauded for being so “brave” by everyone. Even though he was a razors edge away from noncing it.

So those that claim “nope” and nothing to see here, are collegiate in the study of wilful blindness.

Re: Schofield
 

Indeed, grooming is a crime

https://www.met.police.uk/advice/adv...llegal%20acts.

Re: Schofield
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65769939

Everything else is prurient speculation - Schofield’s behaviour was completely inappropriate, and should be roundly condemned, but the stories in the tabloids are all "claimed", "sources say", "the Mail has been told", and "ITV insiders" to whip up a frenzy to sell papers and raise outrage.People using emotive terms like "the affair with this teenager, as he would have been a few years ago" and "a razors edge away from noncing it." just show what they do works with some…

As posted earlier in this thread

Remember, these are the same tabloids who did this…

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/ente...y-is-so-gross/

To clarify any potential doubts on my views on this, if Schofield did groom the young man, he should be prosecuted - but the current tabloid witch-hunt is what the "Nope" was referring to..

Re: Schofield
 

This 100%.

Re: Schofield
 

I had seen things suggesting that Matt was associated with him from the age of 10 via the theatre group.



But then that might well be a "nothing to see here" moment because it's common for celebrities to associate themselves with grass roots activities in the performing arts sector. They might well have been aware of each other but not necessarily any overly concerning direct contact.


What is known is that they were in contact on social media when the lad had just turned 15, but again, was this on a mentoring basis? From what I've seen the lad was a talented actor who wanted to be a TV presenter - in a lot of this it's being in the right place at the right time and having contacts who can facilitate a break. Knowing a national TV presenter who can get you a way into opportunities when you're old enough ...


If they then started a relationship when the lad was 18 this is perfectly legal though concerning on grounds of the age gap. But if there's no evidence there was any grooming nothing to see here at all, if they had a close working relationship as colleagues which got a bit closer - again between consenting adults this isn't unusual either.


It still strikes me there's the possibility he's groomed a (good-looking) young lad into a relationship as soon as they could but in reality such allegations are utterly unproven. But such is showbusiness that he's lost his job and probably won't get another similar because of it... the media seem to be intent on going on about it without saying a lot really.

Re: Schofield
 

Yes, it matters if it is true and there is evidence to support but while it is just click bait tabloid dirt, it does not.

BTW, not sure "collegiate in the study of wilful blindness" really works here

Re: Schofield
 

It’s more than tabloid tittle tattle if he’s fundamentally lost his job for whatever went on. If it’s tabloid tittle tattle then ITV as his employer had a duty of care to him.

Re: Schofield
 

There are far more important things happening that should have our attention than this.

Re: Schofield
 

Is there?

Media corruption. Political corruption. Police corruption.

Who is looking after who?

Re: Schofield
 

Climate change, inflation, the economy, jobs, wages, declining public services and a thousand other issues should be ahead of consenting adults having a fling. It's piffle.

Poor state of our 'journalism' is the only issue here.

Re: Schofield
 

With corruption embedded in all strands of the state and the media how do you expect to solve any of those issues you outline without resolving that first?

Re: Schofield
 

It’s Probably more in the public interest than round 34 of party gate. But you were all in on that.

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

I’m sure if it was your 12 year old son/daughter that had been allegedly groomed, so that on 1 minute past their 18th birthday they were having sex with 50+ year old guy, that held a powerful influential position above them. Climate change, inflation etc would still take precedence?

Not my child, who cares, type of stance, seeming to be taken by people on here is really edifying.

Re: Schofield
 

I am not sure the sniping adds to the debate here.

Re: Schofield
 

You’re going full tabloid on this, aren’t you?

Making up hypothetical situations (the young man started in the show when he was 20*) and then the kicker of which no one has said…

*which is irrelevant, as abuse of position is wrong no matter the age, but you seemed (to use your term) to be going for the shock factor…

Re: Schofield
 

You are really going over the top on this. Accusing others here of effectively sanctioning sex with children is weird :dunce:

I am happy to wait for evidence and a referral to the Police if merited.

Re: Schofield
 

Typical hypocrisy here accusing me of going over the top. Whist also saying I’m accusing others of sanctioning child sex!! I’ve done nothing of the sort.

Calling out apathy about a story, where I see it. That is all. Unlike you, I’ve accused no one.

---------- Post added at 14:55 ---------- Previous post was at 14:42 ----------

All I’ve done is call out the apathy surrounding it.

“It’s not important”. ……”There are more important things”…………. “it’s piffle”

All of which…have been said.

18…….and he’d known him since 15. If it’s 1 second after his 18th birthday or six months after, what Difference does it make? I don’t discern one. But hey if you do, fair enough.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-b2348005.html

Re: Schofield
 

Schofield out looking for sympathy. Wait there while I look for the world's smallest violin.

Re: Schofield
 

Apathy? What apathy? The media has gone full all out nuclear about this. No chance to be apathetic. However I do think waiting until the full and unvarnished facts are known we should all shut up in the meantime. Trust the media to blow up a media centric news story. It's become a great way for the government to sneak out all sorts of interesting newsworthy stories that can get lost in all of the furore.

Re: Schofield
 

There has been no apathy here.

The reality is, Philip Schofield was until very recently represented by a very powerful talent agency that has the ability to deny access to its clients to any newspaper, magazine or TV channel that ran ‘unfavourable’ reports on anyone on its roster. Everyone in the media knew there was a whif of scandal here but it wasn’t worth the blowback to report it, especially as what’s presented here is definitely salacious but not (demonstrably) illegal. Schofield and his agency have now parted ways and it is safe for newspapers to go to town on him without losing the ability to get access to many of the other big names in entertainment presently gracing our TV screens.

Re: Schofield
 

I am not sure if Private Eye went after him, they're usually good at doing that.

Re: Schofield
 

Eye is generally interested in people who exercise political power or influence and/or who are enriching themselves from public funds. They’re not so interested in celebrity gossip except perhaps where it is demonstrably connected with illegal behaviour.

Accusing someone of a criminal offence (grooming a minor) is inviting a libel action. If you say it you had better be able to prove it. Schofield has now acknowledged that people have insinuated that but has flatly denied it. The media is free to report that now but anyone deciding to repeat the allegation in future, without solid proof, would still be at risk of legal action.

Re: Schofield
 

If anyone is interested in hearing Philip Schofield’s side of the story, there’s an interview with him on the BBC I-Player from today.

Re: Schofield
 

If he said the affair was with Holly, this would be a non story.


If he harms himself all those who called him a nonce/paedo will have blood on their hands, and hopefully feel the long arm of the law.

Re: Schofield
 

I am waiting to hear from Katie Price (Jordan) about Schofield. Her opinion weighs a lot for me. In last count, 2.5 kilos of silicone per boob.

11 min interview on BBC? What a disgrace...Look at the front page

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news

I live in "affluent" Surrey and people are hungry, food banks are empty. Phil's dick is page 1?

Re: Schofield
 

Not for me, thank you.

Re: Schofield
 

Zero interest in the story here.

I did note hes old enough to just retire.

Re: Schofield
 

Well, maybe you should all stop commenting, then. How can you be so sure of your views when you decide only to listen to one side of the story?

It doesn’t surprise me, though.

I don’t like the man personally, but I am happy to hear him out.

Re: Schofield
 

Would the same level of tabloid frenzy would be happening if he was a heterosexual man having a relationship with a young women?

Re: Schofield
 

Homophobia is definitely involved here. If something illegal has happened, why haven't the police acted? All cobblers to sell papers. Meanwhile, back in the real world, that actually affects people, the UK is going down the plughole, which they don't want to report. Doesn't sell well.

Re: Schofield
 

Yes, potentially more so.

Re: Schofield
 

See Daily Mail's front page (attached). I am confused

*What is Holly's ass have to do with the case?

* Are we supposed to read it as one word "assHolly"? Is this an insult or is it referring to the private parts of Matt/Phil?

Re: Schofield
 

Not convinced. For example, the 83 year old Al Pacino is having a child with his 29 yr old girlfriend. DiCaprio who is touching 50, started dating his current girlfriend when she was 19. Hardly a murmur in the tabloid press ...

Re: Schofield
 

whatever it is, it's about time the media lost their toy about it.


They clearly can't name or show unblurred pics of M because of the restrictions, nor should they without his permission (there's plenty he's put in the public domain like on professional profiles etc so it's easy to find stuff about him - his exact DOB is on imdb).


There clearly isn't much extra news because P has already left TM and so H will need another replacement presenter for the show. The relationship ended in 2020 so there's no new developments or "sightings of M and P snogging in Hyde Park on a bench" for example. Nor should that matter because they are (now) two consenting adults irrespective of what may or may not have gone off between them before M was 18 (of which there's no proof offered yet).


They keep going on about it whilst saying nothing new now...

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:36 ----------

Yes but that's just an age gap.


Unless Leonardo was seeing his girlfriend at a theatre group from 10 and messaging her on twitter at 15 then dating her basically as soon as she became legal and getting her a job...


It's not the age gap that's concerning, it's how young the kid was at the time (and he looks quite young for 18 on that pic between H and P, the unblurred version is everywhere), and that they had known each other for years before.


Doesn't matter for me if it's a man with a young lad or a young woman, in fact in those cases it'd probably get similar levels of scrutiny, not sure about an adult woman with a teenage boy or girl though...

Re: Schofield
 

Probably, they like to stir up a good scandal.

I thought this was to do with their age (ie with him being under 18/16) ? I dont know for sure as I have no real interest.

Re: Schofield
 

Did any of them first meet when they were 10, with the older party getting the younger into a job, keep their initial affair secret from said employer?

Re: Schofield
 

Not that is really matters I suppose but just to present a contrast:

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/enterta...eline-age-gap/

Re: Schofield
 

Worrying.

Re: Schofield
 

It's genuinely puzzling that it's considered a deflection AND a worthwhile Schofield defence.

Re: Schofield
 

Well until the long arm of the law is involved I suggest this is now old news.

Re: Schofield
 

No defence here. Just illuminating the wider world. As I said before, I'm uneasy with the judgment-by-tabloid process. I'd rather wait for more credible evidence.