I want to second what
@Teal99 said earlier. We have to be careful and attempt to be fair in our discussions of this topic.
Before anyone slams me for being part of PS's team, I most certainly am not, and I have asked the same questions as everyone else all along. I would love to figure out the truth.
Things do look really bad, but as someone who once worked in PR/Marketing, I know how easily information can be skewed to create a false image, and it is just as easy for us to view this information through our selective bias now, and create a picture that is false. There is a risk that we are misinterpreting the real story in the absence of information, so we ought to be careful before we draw any conclusions.
There have been posts saying he is sick, this is an outrage, how may children did he prey on, etc. However, as I posted in one of the earlier threads, that concern is based purely on conjecture. We do not actually know what is happening here.
Think about how many people's reputations we are dragging along in this discussion:
PS, his wife, his daughters and all his coworkers (whom people here have rightly said are now implicated in this).
Then there is Holly and her family.
MM and his twin/mother's pictures have been posted- which isn't fair to them, as they may have nothing to do with this.
And now Simon Schofield and his family have been repeatedly brought into this.
I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss these issues and I am not policing this at all. Of course we should, as it may bring something to light that needs to be investigated, but we must be responsible in the way we're doing it.
I am asking that people consider the language they're using. Some of the posts made are harsh and quite damning, but based on very little
actual evidence. These people and their families' reputations may be forever tarnished by the connections we are making, and those connections may prove to be completely unfounded in time. We should all tread lightly.
After some thought, this is what I believe I can conclude at this time (imo, other's may freely disagree):
- SS and MM were family friends, based on that Xmas dinner photo that shows the family with SS, and the other photos of them regularly hanging out together.
- PS and SS have worked together in theatre and PS is the patron of the 2faces school, which MM attended.
- When MM decided to work in TV, SS leveraged his connection to PS to get MM a runner's gig and a leg up in ITV.
- The PS-MM relationship may only have become romantic after MM turned 18/19/20- we just cannot assume it was when he was underage and he was groomed. We don't know this.
- Once PS broke up with MM, MM was removed from all the programmes he worked on with PS, which lead to MM threatening to leak the story.
- Then PS got ahead of the scandal by outing himself, so as to minimize damage to his reputation. I think his concern above all would be how much older he is than MM, and how scandalous it would seem as it doesn't fit in with the public image he has built over the years.
Now the other stuff is a bit more complex. There could be something there or not.
- The social media messages from PS to various fans are weird. They make me wonder. But the content of the messages are nothing more than quick hellos and smiley emojis. A lot of famous people will connect with fans this way, it's part of their appeal to be this relatable. Since it went viral that PS replies to these messages, I can see why all those kids would start messaging him and it became a bit of a game amongst lads who wanted to get a famous person to chat with them or to create a viral snap/tweet of their own.
I cannot conclude this is sinister based on the content of those messages. I will say they should be investigated further because there may or may not be something there.
An example of how many famous people do this: Kylie Jenner contacted a fan on social media and took him to his prom. Was she grooming him?
- There is also clearly an issue with a much older man dating a younger one because it creates a huge power imbalance, particularly when that older man is your boss. However, we don't know, perhaps MM was happy with a sugar daddy? Not everyone has to be groomed to want to secure that kind of relationship. There are many young women who happily
seek those arrangements with older men to afford them a luxe life. Do I agree with it? No. But I recognize that it doesn't immediately translate to those women being groomed (although, of course, many young people are groomed).
- I also think the super injunction may likely be because of the age gap/ hidden relationship behind his wife's back, and the fact that it would affect not only PS's future career, but also MM's future in all sorts of ways. I can imagine a court agreeing to a super injunction because a judge would want to protect
MM's reputation by not having his name dragged into all sorts of salacious tabloid gossip, given his age and the fact that he is just at the start of his budding career.
That's my piece. I've seen others getting slammed for offering a differing opinion, so I expect I will be, too.
However, IMHO, controlling the narrative and only allowing people who are readily labeling PS a pervert and groomer to post, but slamming anyone who tries to remain objective and fair, is no better than PS silencing all the media with the injunction to control his narrative. We ought not do what he is doing.
I think it's our responsibility to a) continue talking about this so that we force more information out, but equally b) bear in mind how many people we've mentioned on this thread in correlation to grooming/ Saville/ sinister activity all around. Their families may see these comments, their coworkers, their friends. We may ruin their reputations unintentionally and based on conjecture with little actual evidence. It's also inappropriate to post pictures of MM's relatives, IMO.
I'm hopeful that whatever the truth is, it will come to light.
Edited to correct all the typos.
