I remember reading what happened but can't remember the details. When & why did Matthew Wright reveal that it was John Leslie who raped(?) Ulrika Johnson? And how did he know in the first place?
The name was known throughout the media, The Wright Stuff were having a discussion on date-rape and Mathew just blurted the name out!!
They were discussing the paper coverage, that Ulrika was getting about her allegations, and MW said something along the lines of, 'in the papers, all the suggestion is that it's John Leslie' No further reference was made to it during the programme that day, iirc, and it was a kind of did he really say that ? thing.
It may have been during the papers discussion they used to have at the beginning of the programme, or maybe not, as I remember flicking over to John Leslie on the other side, thinking he's got no idea what's just happened to change his career.
They were discussing the paper coverage, that Ulrika was getting about her allegations, and MW said something along the lines of, 'in the papers, all the suggestion is that it's John Leslie' No further reference was made to it during the programme that day, iirc, and it was a kind of did he really say that ? thing.
Yes, he blurted the name out during the discussion!!!! red faces all around that day!!!
I actually think John Leslie could of resurrected his career. He was OK as a presenter, and i think a lot of people felt sorry for him initially - thinking he had been wrongly accused.
But then the photos of him were in the papers, alleged sex romps and 'three in a bed' stories with Abi (get ya tits out) Titmuss ..... and then more women jumped on the bandwagon saying he had raped them.
It went to court, and i dont believe he was charged with anything.
I actually think John Leslie could of resurrected his career. He was OK as a presenter, and i think a lot of people felt sorry for him initially - thinking he had been wrongly accused.
But then the photos of him were in the papers, alleged sex romps and 'three in a bed' stories with Abi (get ya tits out) Titmuss ..... and then more women jumped on the bandwagon saying he had raped them.
It went to court, and i dont believe he was charged with anything.
But the scandal killed his career.
That's why I think it was set up for MW to say his name. No one knew all the other stuff was going to happen and most people knew the rumours were about JL and he could defend himself once his name was out there.
That's why I think it was set up for MW to say his name. No one knew all the other stuff was going to happen and most people knew the rumours were about JL and he could defend himself once his name was out there.
Yep, MW and JL remained friends - JL was seen "strangling" MW in that year's christmas comedy video for Proper Crimbo.
They were discussing the paper coverage, that Ulrika was getting about her allegations, and MW said something along the lines of, 'in the papers, all the suggestion is that it's John Leslie' No further reference was made to it during the programme that day, iirc, and it was a kind of did he really say that ? thing.
Matthew did say after the break that he was sorry and that it wasn't John Leslie that Fleet Street was naming as the man who raped Ulrika. It certainly wasn't brushed under the rug on that particular programme.
Didn't she say in her autobiography or somewhere else that she hads once gone on a date with John Leslie and they had gone to the cinema and he took her back to her hotel but that nothing happened between them and then when she made the rape allegation she said it was a well known tv presenter who raped her in a hotel room after a date at the cinema and the rumour mill went nuts.
Didn't she say in her autobiography or somewhere else that she hads once gone on a date with John Leslie and they had gone to the cinema and he took her back to her hotel but that nothing happened between them and then when she made the rape allegation she said it was a well known tv presenter who raped her in a hotel room after a date at the cinema and the rumour mill went nuts.
i think you're correct Karen, as soon as the rape allegation came out and the back drop to the cinema story was revealed, all of fleet street were in over drive printing and implying it was John Leslie.
I actually think John Leslie could of resurrected his career. He was OK as a presenter, and i think a lot of people felt sorry for him initially - thinking he had been wrongly accused.
But then the photos of him were in the papers, alleged sex romps and 'three in a bed' stories with Abi (get ya tits out) Titmuss ..... and then more women jumped on the bandwagon saying he had raped them.
It went to court, and i dont believe he was charged with anything.
But the scandal killed his career.
This is the trouble with scandals. The fact that whenever there's a one that's been created, loads of women start jumping on the bandwagon by stating that said celebrity done the same thing with them as well. And you know, it's probably all a load of rubbish because if they had of done the same thing with them, they'd have likely come forward ages ago. These tell talers are probably just interested in making money off a story that's based on 100% lies.
What Ulrika did to John Leslie was dispicable, she waited until she had a book to sell before she mentioned rape and then let people make assumptions, she could have said whether it was him or not, she wasted god knows how much police time and the taxpayer paid for it, John Leslie was destroyed, no wonder he ended up on drugs.
These women who cry rape to the media for attention, money or whatever are an insult to genuine victims. If they were raped either report it, or not, that is the woman's decision and they must struggle with it, but when it is thrown out there to the tabloids it just sounds like they are lying.
What Ulrika did to John Leslie was dispicable, she waited until she had a book to sell before she mentioned rape and then let people make assumptions, she could have said whether it was him or not, she wasted god knows how much police time and the taxpayer paid for it, John Leslie was destroyed, no wonder he ended up on drugs.
These women who cry rape to the media for attention, money or whatever are an insult to genuine victims. If they were raped either report it, or not, that is the woman's decision and they must struggle with it, but when it is thrown out there to the tabloids it just sounds like they are lying.
I do believe that MW saying his name was set up so that JL couldd 'clear' his name, however Ulrika could have done that for him and said that it wasnt him and then this would have been all over like a flash.
Always seems odd to me that the UJ apologists always cite her silence on the matter as somehow admirable - 'Well, she didn't name him, it wasn't HER fault' blah blah blah. It was an open secret in showbiz circles before MW blurted it out - who do you think, out of the two people present at the allleged incident, was responsible for putting his name out there? Clue - unlikely to be JL.
There were also I believe questions regarding UJs subsequent 'four day' hospital stay for 'internal injuries', which turned out to be grossly exaggerated.
I'd be very surprised if the 'attack' happened to be honest, and even more so if Leslie committed it, given his 'cosy' interview on Big Breakfast (?) with her 6 months later. It was a publicity stunt in which she allowed a mans life to be torn apart just to keep her mug in the papers, and her lack of success over the past few years indicates a lot of others have come to the same conclusion...
Matthew Wright for not being able to link his brain and mouth, which unfortunately is a common occurance on the Wright Stuff, one of the worst panel discussion shows in television history
John Leslie for having no sense of self-control and living a life second only to Michael Barrymore in terms of life and career meltdown
Ulrika Jonsson for never clarifying whether Leslie was the alleged attacker or not, and for never reporting the alleged rape in the first instance.
Comments
And John Leslie was tried and hung very quickly.
photos of him raping Ulrika???
They were discussing the paper coverage, that Ulrika was getting about her allegations, and MW said something along the lines of, 'in the papers, all the suggestion is that it's John Leslie' No further reference was made to it during the programme that day, iirc, and it was a kind of did he really say that ? thing.
It may have been during the papers discussion they used to have at the beginning of the programme, or maybe not, as I remember flicking over to John Leslie on the other side, thinking he's got no idea what's just happened to change his career.
Yes, he blurted the name out during the discussion!!!! red faces all around that day!!!
But then the photos of him were in the papers, alleged sex romps and 'three in a bed' stories with Abi (get ya tits out) Titmuss ..... and then more women jumped on the bandwagon saying he had raped them.
It went to court, and i dont believe he was charged with anything.
But the scandal killed his career.
That's why I think it was set up for MW to say his name. No one knew all the other stuff was going to happen and most people knew the rumours were about JL and he could defend himself once his name was out there.
Yep, MW and JL remained friends - JL was seen "strangling" MW in that year's christmas comedy video for Proper Crimbo.
Matthew did say after the break that he was sorry and that it wasn't John Leslie that Fleet Street was naming as the man who raped Ulrika. It certainly wasn't brushed under the rug on that particular programme.
A girl I once worked with went out with him. They split up in quite an acrimonious way.
Please tell me she had the sense to say 'NO'
i think you're correct Karen, as soon as the rape allegation came out and the back drop to the cinema story was revealed, all of fleet street were in over drive printing and implying it was John Leslie.
This is the trouble with scandals. The fact that whenever there's a one that's been created, loads of women start jumping on the bandwagon by stating that said celebrity done the same thing with them as well. And you know, it's probably all a load of rubbish because if they had of done the same thing with them, they'd have likely come forward ages ago. These tell talers are probably just interested in making money off a story that's based on 100% lies.
Maybe after Ulrika 'accidently' blurted it out to him:rolleyes:
These women who cry rape to the media for attention, money or whatever are an insult to genuine victims. If they were raped either report it, or not, that is the woman's decision and they must struggle with it, but when it is thrown out there to the tabloids it just sounds like they are lying.
Completely agree with your post.
The
Latest article here --> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2258348/John-Leslie-reveals-attack-claims-destroyed-life-left-recluse.html
I do believe that MW saying his name was set up so that JL couldd 'clear' his name, however Ulrika could have done that for him and said that it wasnt him and then this would have been all over like a flash.
Yet she didnt.
There were also I believe questions regarding UJs subsequent 'four day' hospital stay for 'internal injuries', which turned out to be grossly exaggerated.
I'd be very surprised if the 'attack' happened to be honest, and even more so if Leslie committed it, given his 'cosy' interview on Big Breakfast (?) with her 6 months later. It was a publicity stunt in which she allowed a mans life to be torn apart just to keep her mug in the papers, and her lack of success over the past few years indicates a lot of others have come to the same conclusion...
Matthew Wright for not being able to link his brain and mouth, which unfortunately is a common occurance on the Wright Stuff, one of the worst panel discussion shows in television history
John Leslie for having no sense of self-control and living a life second only to Michael Barrymore in terms of life and career meltdown
Ulrika Jonsson for never clarifying whether Leslie was the alleged attacker or not, and for never reporting the alleged rape in the first instance.
Didn't Ulrika state as a result of the alledged attack she spent 3-4 days in hospital?
If John Leslie was not the person responsible then Ulrika has allowed a violent rapist to escape justice?
In light of the Saville situation wonder if she will have a change of mind reporting it to the police?