Another BBC star in trouble, regular presenter of The One Show
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy76pdz5152o

NO - sacked for ALLEGED behaviour. Our species is falling apart.

More pertinently the media is consumed by a hysterical absolutism. Jenas ejected because of an alleged text messages, Sean Wilson unpersoned from Coronation Street for reasons not even his castmates are allowed to know about.

No sense of humanity or even acknowledging people are human and may occasionally err. But when they do they should be given room to apologise and be absolved, just as it used to be.

Instead we are reduced to a vanilla world of vanilla people unwilling to break boundaries or even put a foot wrong.

Media is now run by cowards. Prove me wrong.

JK2006 wrote:
NO - sacked for ALLEGED behaviour. Our species is falling apart.

The issue appears to be contained within texts that have been sent so unlike other cases it's unlikely there will be any doubt that the incidents have taken place as the BBC will be in procession of the relevant texts. I don't believe therefore this false accusation case

Should he have been sacked? If he has breached the terms of his contract (morality and conduct clauses) by sending the texts then the BBC will have the right to have sacked him.

Did he have to be sacked? No and within any other organisation this issue would have been mediated and a less severe solution found.

I have no idea what the texts said or if there were any. An investigation must have been made. But I suspect a decision was made for image purposes ("we don't want another Savile/Huw Edwards/Gambo...") - and that decision did NOT examine both sides of any story.

JK2006 wrote:
I have no idea what the texts said or if there were any. An investigation must have been made. But I suspect a decision was made for image purposes ("we don't want another Savile/Huw Edwards/Gambo...") - and that decision did NOT examine both sides of any story.

He could be another cocky ex-footballer who only think off balls than brains. I don't know if he was any good or not.

I agree with Blue Boy, if he has breached the terms of his contract then he has screwed himself. It's like any employee.

People should know that a lot of people don't delete emails or texts etc.

Gary Lineker is always tweeting about his political views such as Palestine or Brexit, when he is supposed to be neutral. All he ever gets is a slap on the wrist.

robbiex wrote:
Gary Lineker is always tweeting about his political views such as Palestine or Brexit, when he is supposed to be neutral. All he ever gets is a slap on the wrist.

He must of seen something inappropriate in the offices or he has touched his toes.

He may have received a fair hearing internally and the BBC decided to sack him on strong evidence, who knows. Though I am sure they are very conscious currently of image management. The positive side of these stories though is that women (mainly) are less likely to be harassed in the work place. I have no problem with that.

JK2006 wrote:
I have no idea what the texts said or if there were any. An investigation must have been made. But I suspect a decision was made for image purposes ("we don't want another Savile/Huw Edwards/Gambo...") - and that decision did NOT examine both sides of any story.

I agree that image/perception would motivate the decision

I disagree with your other statement for the same reason. The BBC legal department and the outside council tgey will have employed will make sure they have followed procedure and the image/perception of any future judge or court will be that they have given Jermaine and his representatives the right to deny he sent them. or if he had any comments to make on the subject.