Gregg Wallace hits out at 'handful' of accusers

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I am not arguing any number is a standard rate.

I have checked and on Masterchef alone they start with 58 so over 20 years 4,000 is a believable figure especially when you also add all contestants on Master Chef Professionals, so again can you answer one question do you not find it strange only 13 of all the the people he has worked with over 20 years have come forward now, surely if telling dirty jokes and being a bit pervy was the norm and he saw no wrong in doing it he would have told these jokes in front of all contestants not just these 13!

I think you're making the assumption that because only 13 made a complaint, that only 13 found his behaviour objectionable. Given the amount of coverage the story has gotten, I can't blame people for not coming forward.
 
I am not arguing any number is a standard rate.

I have checked and on Masterchef alone they start with 58 so over 20 years 4,000 is a believable figure especially when you also add all contestants on Master Chef Professionals, so again can you answer one question do you not find it strange only 13 of all the the people he has worked with over 20 years have come forward now, surely if telling dirty jokes and being a bit pervy was the norm and he saw no wrong in doing it he would have told these jokes in front of all contestants not just these 13!
Are we back to 'smutty jokes' now? Forgetting the running around almost naked (more than one person saw this), inappropriate touching - would everyone present have seen or experienced this?

And apparently complaints were made and the BBC ignored.
 
I think you're making the assumption that because only 13 made a complaint, that only 13 found his behaviour objectionable. Given the amount of coverage the story has gotten, I can't blame people for not coming forward.

I am sure in a case like this there will be a ay is a way they can report it without their names being used in the press.
 
Are we back to 'smutty jokes' now? Forgetting the running around almost naked (more than one person saw this), inappropriate touching - would everyone present have seen or experienced this?

And apparently complaints were made and the BBC ignored.

We do not have any proof exactly the same as in the case of rape accusations that ruined the career of the young talented football player mentioned earlier.
 
We do not have any proof exactly the same as in the case of rape accusations that ruined the career of the young talented football player mentioned earlier.

There might never be proof. What there may be is an overwhelming body of evidence that mounts up. At what number do you start listening and believing those that come forward?
 
I keep going back to the same argument if he thought telling dirty jokes was the norm and he has worked with 4,000 contestants over the 20 years surely more than 13 would have come forward especially now its out in the open, this sums it up for me it was just banter to him he saw nothing wrong telling these jokes he would therefore have been telling them all of the time . (not the working class hero bit)

 
There might never be proof. What there may be is an overwhelming body of evidence that mounts up. At what number do you start listening and believing those that come forward?
Every accuser should of course be believed, but taking action against someone with zero proof seems a lot like distinct lack of due process, that in turn is the shadow of anarchy.
 
We don't. Yet.

The BBC clearly think they have enough to make decisions on his future engagement with the show and indeed the show itself.

They were under a lot of pressure to pull tonight's programme and the reast of the series they are not doing so.
 
I keep going back to the same argument if he thought telling dirty jokes was the norm and he has worked with 4,000 contestants over the 20 years surely more than 13 would have come forward especially now its out in the open, this sums it up for me it was just banter to him he saw nothing wrong telling these jokes he would therefore have been telling them all of the time . (not the working class hero bit)


Maybe start reading some of the allegations.
 
I refer you to my earlier post -
And yet you posted this?

I keep going back to the same argument if he thought telling dirty jokes was the norm and he has worked with 4,000 contestants over the 20 years surely more than 13 would have come forward especially now its out in the open, this sums it up for me it was just banter to him he saw nothing wrong telling these jokes he would therefore have been telling them all of the time . (not the working class hero bit)

 
Unfortunately that doesn't happen when you live in the spot light. Trial by social media, your a city fan. Mendy lost his career because he was accused of rape. He was proven innocent in a court of law. Now he is claiming loss of earnings against city.
It's a crazy world we live in
I appreciate this is going off on a tangent somewhat, but Mendy deserves every penny from City.
Yes, what he did was morally wrong, but blimey, if every time a Football player was pulled because they were shagging around, there would be no-one left playing football!

Put me in a similar situation - being a multi-millionaire and you can have anyone you want? I mean, you'd be hard pushed not to make the most of it!
It's not like he was married with kids.
 
And that was before i posted -



You do get how forums post numbers work don't you?
Yes. I especially note that it was a reply to me after I questioned that original post. And I quoted it again because you as yet haven't acknowledged that it was ill-informed.

Why are you trying to downplay these allegations?
 
Chippy Tea - I have heard several its all over the news but allegations are all they are lets see where it goes from here.
Why are you trying to downplay these allegations

I will repeat my earlier post they are allegations lets see where it goes from here.

Allegation - A statement that someone has done something wrong or illegal, but which has not been proved to be true.
 
Last edited:
Every accuser should of course be believed, but taking action against someone with zero proof seems a lot like distinct lack of due process, that in turn is the shadow of anarchy.

Even in a court of law, definitive proof isn't always necessary. If a pattern of behaviour has been corroborated by 13 people so far, then I think it's fair to say that there could be something worth looking at. The BBC clearly think so now too.

Stuff like this should always be thoroughly investigated, and not be a trial by media. I'm not saying that that's him banged to rights and he should be hung, drawn and quartered, but the contrary position of defending him to the hilt because "only 13" people have come forward, I find equally troubling.
 
Back
Top