Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
Well, my clinical advice would be, don’t endanger you mental health by perving over an adolescent, paying them tens of thousands of pounds for sordid photos and then getting caught.
Maybe, being a very high profile BBC presenter, known to millions, he might have thought that through.
And even if he did/does suffer from depression, playing the mental health card at this time will no doubt take the heat off.
Nasty press and public must not all pile on the poor fragile guy
|
Let's just say that there's a high chance that we don't know and never will know the full story. Especially now the police have investigated and are taking no further action and the person concerned has been named.
Let's also just say that it is perfectly natural for a human being to be attracted to another human being. There are some relationships which society (rightly or wrongly) deems are inappropriate, but these attractions are still biologically natural. This includes attractions to young kids. Though there is clearly something not right with a grown adult being sexually attracted to a pre-pubescent child, this is still a natural attraction for them, though it is rightly not allowed. Though let us not forget that in some countries same-sex relationships are still illegal and it's not too long since they were legalised here. A post-pubescent child whilst still under the legal age of consent is basically an adult biologically and this is (correctly) a society decision that this is also not allowed.
Even that is making assumptions in this case. All we "know" is that he allegedly paid a 17 year old boy for photos so the kid could fuel his cocaine habit. How much of this was just out of convenience and how did it come about? Did the kid contact HE offering the photos for cash without disclosing his age (did he say or claim or imply he was over 18) or the motives for needing the money? Did he just pay thinking he was helping out and not really care for the images he was getting? Is it all made up?
It is after all illegal to solicit sexual photos of an under 18, even though they can have sex at 16. So it is possible there was some coercion involved and maybe there was some omissions or lies which led them to believe there was nothing wrong.
Or maybe HE, a respected presenter who has integrity and religious belief, is secretly a perv and neither us nor his wife knew anything about it. But that scenario is less likely as if there was any evidence of laws being broken then I doubt the case would have been dismissed (it might have been investigated further, but that hasn't happened).