The only problem is your imagination, how do you know it was leaked in 2014 and not before but was not used?
We don't, but perhaps we should? Your theory though relies on the Mirror sitting on the clip for possibly up to a year, and only using it when Cohen was trying to get Clarkson sacked.
I'd don't have a problem with timings as it's of no concern....unless you are suggestion Clarkson's second wife (his manager) realised the first wife was telling the truth and sort revenge?
You're the one raising the scorned woman theory, but a scorned Cohen sounds more plausible to me.
You say that now....had they not been told to take the argument outside, presumably because it was disturbing guests, as indicated by the report into the incident.
The producer eventually removed himself from the hotel and is said to have gone to hospital...there is no indication he retaliated against the lout who assaulted him.
If they yad been told to take it outside and Tymon did go outside, it begs the question, why did he do so?
Along with the stars being erased from websites. The history eraser at work, they are unpersons!
Or.. The month's past, so does this mean Hammond and May's contractual status and continued use of their image has been resolved?
Thinking about this, I am wondering whether they uave been removed from the TG website because all references to 'Top Gear' and 'BBC' have been removed from the live shows.
The only problem is your imagination, how do you know it was leaked in 2014 and not before but was not used? I'd don't have a problem with timings as it's of no concern....unless you are suggestion Clarkson's second wife (his manager) realised the first wife was telling the truth and sort revenge?
Clarkson conveniently lifted a gagging order when she threatened to go to court and prove what she was saying was true and have the injunction overturned.
I do wonder who leaked Clarkson's version of events that he hit no one, must have been the BBC?
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the newspaper did in fact have the file for months, just waiting for something from either Top Gear or the BBC, intending to use it to escalate the situation.
If they yad been told to take it outside and Tymon did go outside, it begs the question, why did he do so?
Why not just retire to his room thus ending it?
From the official report....
...on 4 March 2015 Oisin Tymon was subject to an unprovoked physical and verbal attack by Jeremy Clarkson. During the physical attack Oisin Tymon was struck, resulting in swelling and bleeding to his lip. The verbal abuse was sustained over a longer period, both at the time of the physical attack and subsequently.
The incident occurred on a patio area of the Simonstone Hall hotel, where Oisin Tymon was working on location for Top Gear.
It is the case that Oisin Tymon offered no retaliation
The verbal abuse was directed at Oisin Tymon on more than one occasion – both during the attack and subsequently inside the hotel.
It would seem to have been a one sided argument, with the producer trying to calm Clarkson down and for his efforts he was hit?
We don't, but perhaps we should? Your theory though relies on the Mirror sitting on the clip for possibly up to a year, and only using it when Cohen was trying to get Clarkson sacked.
Your theory relies on not knowing who, when or why the unseen footage was made available.
Newspapers can sometimes hold on to material for years especially if a celeb is a source of revenue or a PR has offered a string of 'exclusives'.
Clarkson has had on going arguments with the Daily Mirror, he mentioned the paper negatively in one of his Sunday Times articles...maybe it stems from when Piers Morgan was the editor?
A well known celeb was married to his manager and privately she put with a lot from the aspiring celeb she turned into a megastar...eventually she had enough and through a friendly PR a string of negative stories about her husband appeared.
You seem to forget Clarkson only continued to work on Top Gear if he was offered a contract, there was no need to create a convoluted plan to 'sack' him. Extremely popular presenters have found they have been 'let go' or not had their contracts renewed.
Exactly, going outside to continue an argument is hardly the way to calm things down. Not seen any comments on how much alcohol he had drunk.
The desperate attempts to make this sound like it wasn't an unprovoked and sustained attack on an innocent person are laughable.
Why assume Oisin went outside in order to "continue the argument"? Isn't it far more likely he was either trying to get away (which is exactly what Clarkson's defenders are saying he should have done), or else he was simply trying to move Clarkson away from the members of the public inside the hotel who were witnessing his violent tantrum.
Exactly, going outside to continue an argument is hardly the way to calm things down. Not seen any comments on how much alcohol he had drunk.
Didn't the newspapers report Clarkson & chums spent 2-3 hours in a pub and James May said on camera he was blind drunk, if they had not eaten.....
The evidence from eye witnesses was that it was Clarkson doing the shouting did the producer who appears top have been calm know that Clarkson was about to hit him?
In case you missed it all parties agreed the facts and the report stated...
It was not disputed by Jeremy Clarkson or any witness that Oisin Tymon was the victim of an unprovoked physical and verbal attack.
Derogatory and abusive language, relating to Oisin Tymon and other members of the Top Gear team, continued to be used by Jeremy Clarkson inside the hotel, in the presence of others, for a sustained period of time.
The evidence points to Clarkson letting rip, if reported correctly Clarkson was asked to go outside probably because he was causing a disturbance inside the hotel, if he had not been a celeb it's possible the hotel would have called the police.
I get the feeling some contributors to this thread still have the old fashioned notion a female shouldn't complain if she is raped because of what she was wearing.
The desperate attempts to make this sound like it wasn't an unprovoked and sustained attack on an innocent person are laughable.
Why assume Oisin went outside in order to "continue the argument"? Isn't it far more likely he was either trying to get away (which is exactly what Clarkson's defenders are saying he should have done), or else he was simply trying to move Clarkson away from the members of the public inside the hotel who were witnessing his violent tantrum.
I think you are correct, as Clarkson himself agrees it was an unprovoked assault by himself.
BIB - it's scary language like this that makes you sound like something straight out of Orwell's head.
It more like the weasel words todays PR svavy career politicians try to use such words to emphasise the point they want to make by totally restructuring the question you asked into fit the answer to the question they wished you asked.
"Is it sunny out today?"
"Lets be clear, the real question is of climate change. Climate change is all the fault of immigrants coming over here with their sunshine. You have to accept that if this continues, places like Basingstoke will soon have the climate of Ibiza. Lessons have been learned blah blah blah"
Your theory relies on not knowing who, when or why the unseen footage was made available.
Yup. Do you think that's something the Bbc should have investigated? They may already have, after all it's not good if embarassing footage ends up with the press. That could become a process thing. If something fails compliance, delete it. Don't put it in a folder for future contract negotiations.
..maybe it stems from when Piers Morgan was the editor?
Who knows? They had a feud that pre-dated that leak.
A well known celeb was married to his manager and privately she put with a lot from the aspiring celeb she turned into a megastar...eventually she had enough and through a friendly PR a string of negative stories about her husband appeared.
Problem with your theory is whether this ex would have had any knowledge or ability to leak the clip. Then for the current event, any knowledge of what went on at the hotel, ie how this happened-
An unnamed senior BBC official was quoted in the Mail on Sunday as suggesting Clarkson’s stature and his powerful friends, which includes Prime Minister David Cameron, gives him the freedom to behave in any manner he wishes, and that the support shown for Clarkson appeared “Savilesque”.
Who was this official, and by comparing support for Clarkson to Saville, is he suggesting there were people at the Bbc protecting Saville? Hardly an appropriate comment for a senior official to make, and other details were also leaked to the press.
You seem to forget Clarkson only continued to work on Top Gear if he was offered a contract, there was no need to create a convoluted plan to 'sack' him.
I think I pointed that out earlier, ie it could have been a convenient reason not to renew his contract. But that was before we officially knew about the punch/slap.
Extremely popular presenters have found they have been 'let go' or not had their contracts renewed.
This will be a test of whether or not it is the relationship between the three that fans tune-in for as the live shows are shorn of any and all links to TG and Clarkson is prevented from discussing the "fracas" and the fall-out:
This will be a test of whether or not it is the relationship between the three that fans tune-in for as the live shows are shorn of any and all links to TG and Clarkson is prevented from discussing the "fracas" and the fall-out:
If correct then the antics of diva Clarkson has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort.
I would have thought the video items were completed or near completion maybe just needing a voice over and studio links.
Why not turn the links into a joke at Clarkson's expense. Get the Stig to present the show with a voice that sounds remarkably like Gary Lineaker, his opening could be..."now you know why I wear a helmet when Clarkson is around."
This will be a test of whether or not it is the relationship between the three that fans tune-in for as the live shows are shorn of any and all links to TG and Clarkson is prevented from discussing the "fracas" and the fall-out:
I have been to a couple of the live shows and the Stig hardly features (a quick lap then gone) and they began the show with 30 seconds of car clips from Top Gear before the presenters arrive, again no big deal.
I'm going to one of their Sheffield shows in June, which now appears to be almost sold out, and really like the idea of Clarkson keeping quiet about recent events.
If correct then the antics of diva Clarkson has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort.
Err, no. The BBC's overreaction to the incident has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort. The police took no action in the end - that should tell you something. So there is no reason why they can't show pre-recorded footage, and if they had taken some other action against JC the show could go on.
If it could have been shown that the two in the fracas had shaken hands and agreed to move on, possibly with some kind of punitive fine for JC, then most people (not the rabid haterz on here obviously) would have been happy enough.
If it could have been shown that the two in the fracas had shaken hands and agreed to move on, possibly with some kind of punitive fine for JC, then most people (not the rabid haterz on here obviously) would have been happy enough.
TBH, I think the Bbc was stuck as soon as the punch/slap landed. The police may have decided it's not worth the bother, especially if the victim doesn't want to press charges. But the Bbc couldn't really cover that up, and hitting your workmates is generally unacceptable behaviour.
Err, no. The BBC's overreaction to the incident has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort.
The BBC didn't over-react at all, they took the only action that was available to them. Jeremy Clarkson himself is solely responsible for everything that happened.
Opportunities to prosecute Jimmy Savile and a former mayor of Scarborough over claims of historical sex abuse of children in the resort were missed, North Yorkshire Police has said.
I don't see why you raise this as the two cases are very different.
"North Yorkshire Police has now completed its routine enquiries following the incident at Hawes involving Mr Jeremy Clarkson," the force said.
"Last week... Mr Tymon said he did not wish the police to take action on his behalf. However, at that point we still needed to speak to some members of the public who were present at the time of the incident, who had been affected by the event, and whose views also needed to be considered.
"Now that all the interviews are complete, we have properly established that there is no need for further police action."
Comments
We don't, but perhaps we should? Your theory though relies on the Mirror sitting on the clip for possibly up to a year, and only using it when Cohen was trying to get Clarkson sacked.
You're the one raising the scorned woman theory, but a scorned Cohen sounds more plausible to me.
If they yad been told to take it outside and Tymon did go outside, it begs the question, why did he do so?
Why not just retire to his room thus ending it?
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the newspaper did in fact have the file for months, just waiting for something from either Top Gear or the BBC, intending to use it to escalate the situation.
From the official report....
It would seem to have been a one sided argument, with the producer trying to calm Clarkson down and for his efforts he was hit?
Your theory relies on not knowing who, when or why the unseen footage was made available.
Newspapers can sometimes hold on to material for years especially if a celeb is a source of revenue or a PR has offered a string of 'exclusives'.
Clarkson has had on going arguments with the Daily Mirror, he mentioned the paper negatively in one of his Sunday Times articles...maybe it stems from when Piers Morgan was the editor?
A well known celeb was married to his manager and privately she put with a lot from the aspiring celeb she turned into a megastar...eventually she had enough and through a friendly PR a string of negative stories about her husband appeared.
You seem to forget Clarkson only continued to work on Top Gear if he was offered a contract, there was no need to create a convoluted plan to 'sack' him. Extremely popular presenters have found they have been 'let go' or not had their contracts renewed.
Exactly, going outside to continue an argument is hardly the way to calm things down. Not seen any comments on how much alcohol he had drunk.
Why assume Oisin went outside in order to "continue the argument"? Isn't it far more likely he was either trying to get away (which is exactly what Clarkson's defenders are saying he should have done), or else he was simply trying to move Clarkson away from the members of the public inside the hotel who were witnessing his violent tantrum.
Didn't the newspapers report Clarkson & chums spent 2-3 hours in a pub and James May said on camera he was blind drunk, if they had not eaten.....
The evidence from eye witnesses was that it was Clarkson doing the shouting did the producer who appears top have been calm know that Clarkson was about to hit him?
In case you missed it all parties agreed the facts and the report stated...
The evidence points to Clarkson letting rip, if reported correctly Clarkson was asked to go outside probably because he was causing a disturbance inside the hotel, if he had not been a celeb it's possible the hotel would have called the police.
I get the feeling some contributors to this thread still have the old fashioned notion a female shouldn't complain if she is raped because of what she was wearing.
I think you are correct, as Clarkson himself agrees it was an unprovoked assault by himself.
It more like the weasel words todays PR svavy career politicians try to use such words to emphasise the point they want to make by totally restructuring the question you asked into fit the answer to the question they wished you asked.
"Is it sunny out today?"
"Lets be clear, the real question is of climate change. Climate change is all the fault of immigrants coming over here with their sunshine. You have to accept that if this continues, places like Basingstoke will soon have the climate of Ibiza. Lessons have been learned blah blah blah"
Yup. Do you think that's something the Bbc should have investigated? They may already have, after all it's not good if embarassing footage ends up with the press. That could become a process thing. If something fails compliance, delete it. Don't put it in a folder for future contract negotiations.
Who knows? They had a feud that pre-dated that leak.
Problem with your theory is whether this ex would have had any knowledge or ability to leak the clip. Then for the current event, any knowledge of what went on at the hotel, ie how this happened-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jimmy-savile-victims-call-comparison-of-clarkson-with-prolific-paedophile-totally-offensive-10110151.html
An unnamed senior BBC official was quoted in the Mail on Sunday as suggesting Clarkson’s stature and his powerful friends, which includes Prime Minister David Cameron, gives him the freedom to behave in any manner he wishes, and that the support shown for Clarkson appeared “Savilesque”.
Who was this official, and by comparing support for Clarkson to Saville, is he suggesting there were people at the Bbc protecting Saville? Hardly an appropriate comment for a senior official to make, and other details were also leaked to the press.
I think I pointed that out earlier, ie it could have been a convenient reason not to renew his contract. But that was before we officially knew about the punch/slap.
Yup, especially if they're old and female.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-clarkson-gagged-top-gear-5461442
Unseen footage may remain just that:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/top-gear-enough-footage-two-5461682
If correct then the antics of diva Clarkson has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort.
I would have thought the video items were completed or near completion maybe just needing a voice over and studio links.
Why not turn the links into a joke at Clarkson's expense. Get the Stig to present the show with a voice that sounds remarkably like Gary Lineaker, his opening could be..."now you know why I wear a helmet when Clarkson is around."
The helmet could have a couple of dents in it.
Someone should really take the producer outside and punch him.
I have been to a couple of the live shows and the Stig hardly features (a quick lap then gone) and they began the show with 30 seconds of car clips from Top Gear before the presenters arrive, again no big deal.
I'm going to one of their Sheffield shows in June, which now appears to be almost sold out, and really like the idea of Clarkson keeping quiet about recent events.
Err, no. The BBC's overreaction to the incident has possibly cost licence fee payers millions, in lost revenue, production costs plus time & effort. The police took no action in the end - that should tell you something. So there is no reason why they can't show pre-recorded footage, and if they had taken some other action against JC the show could go on.
If it could have been shown that the two in the fracas had shaken hands and agreed to move on, possibly with some kind of punitive fine for JC, then most people (not the rabid haterz on here obviously) would have been happy enough.
TBH, I think the Bbc was stuck as soon as the punch/slap landed. The police may have decided it's not worth the bother, especially if the victim doesn't want to press charges. But the Bbc couldn't really cover that up, and hitting your workmates is generally unacceptable behaviour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32202245
Good. It would have been a complete waste of time and money, and not in the interests of the taxpayer in the slightest.
Isn't it this the same police force who in December admitted it failed to investigate Jimmy Savile properly..
I don't see why you raise this as the two cases are very different.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32202245