DS Forums

 
 

Sunday mirror front page...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-08-2016, 00:40
ahoyy
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 832
Now if it was Katie's porno gran then I would be interested. She's naughty.
ahoyy is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-08-2016, 00:42
Helen567
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 609
I'm only repeating what the press were reporting when it first blew up and where did I say it was Fact

If what he said was nowhere near as bad as the papers are making it out to be , Then Biggins would be as well to just come out and say exactly what he said ,and put it to bed once and for all ..then no supposition would have to go on by me or anyone else ....The Longer he stays quiet on the whole thing ,the worse it's making him look ,as if he has something to hide ...
He hasn't stayed quiet, there is an exclusive in the Sun.
Helen567 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 00:44
KazzyD
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Up North
Posts: 2,462
'My Nazi shame' TV legend Christopher Biggins on his Big Brother exit after sick holocaust jibe at pal Katie Waissel got him the axe

Biggins is 'mortified by what's happened' following comments that left the nation reeling and saw him kicked off CBB
Biggins said: “I think Channel 5 were trying to protect me by not screening it.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...t-him-the-axe/
KazzyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 00:44
Janette800
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Wales...Land of the Dragon
Posts: 11,430
So how does Katie's mum know what the comments were?
That's what I thought
Janette800 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 00:51
scout2006
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,802
Have you read the article? What does it say that disproves my post?
scout2006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 00:53
cah
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 18,890
He hasn't stayed quiet, there is an exclusive in the Sun.
Yep seen it now Helen ...Best thing he could've done imo ,come out Admit what you've said and apologise ...instead of being like C5 and trying to cover it up
cah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 00:54
Wainy84
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 5,827
Have you read the article? What does it say that disproves my post?
Yes.
Only left the link to the full story.
Wainy84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 01:02
academia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 16,299
How do you know ,and no wishful thinking from me at all ,I'm a firm believer that BB Should show everything H/MS say and do warts and all ,and leave it up to us as viewers to decide whether something is Offensive or not not be Mollycoddled and told something was said ,but it's far to offensive for our little sensitive ears to hear so we'll just have to believe them when they tell us it's for our own good that they don't air it
BB can settle this once and for all by showing the scene where Katie was upset and we can judge how bad it was then. They're usually quick enough to show us flashbacks when Ms are in trouble.
academia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 01:48
silven
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,361
Call the police
silven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 02:31
JVS
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 8,739
What with talks and discussions with lawyers and Endemol no wonder it took a long time to eject Biggins. Luckily, the aids conversation gave them an excuse.
JVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 02:36
JackieDVD
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 331
What with talks and discussions with lawyers and Endemol no wonder it took a long time to eject Biggins. Luckily, the aids conversation gave them an excuse.
Why would there need to be talks with lawyers over the 'joke' the sun mentions?
JackieDVD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 05:07
petesbitch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 190

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpNOQydXEAEUApB.jpg
petesbitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 05:20
hisdogspot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 15,579
oh dear

I recall Katie's family being similarly upset over X Factor too, when they claimed that Katie was getting death threats because she was 'Jewish'
hisdogspot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 05:30
lucy mane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10,011
Biggins lost my support after blaming Katie for being overly emotional. Doing an interview with Dan Wootton is not helping.
lucy mane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 05:41
sorcha_healy27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 68,959
He's a horrible piece of work.
sorcha_healy27 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 05:55
All_seeing_eye
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,854
Well you have to laugh deary.
All_seeing_eye is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 07:04
Susan.Birtles
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 10
Err...no, he isn't. Katie Wassail's mum 'called for a police probe' following an "antisemitic rant". Firstly, there was no such rant - he made a comment (whether ill-judged or otherwise) in jest, not a rant. Furthermore, there has been absolutely no offence committed - most certainly not one under Sections 4, 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which is the common grounds for prosecution for racially and religiously aggravated offences. Of course, a "joke" can be considered grounds for one of these offences (as per Paul Gascoigne, although I am 99% confident the protection against him will be dismissed), however, aside from mitigation of intent, likelihood to cause distress or alarm, level of threat and the environment, the footage wasn't broadcast and as far as I am aware no one has reported being "alarmed" or “distressed" who heard the remarks – a report of what was said is not sfficent grounds for consideration of an offence being committed let alone prosecution.
Outwth legal concerns, moral consideration is a different issue, one for the show’s production company (and ultimately Channel 5) to consider, arguably, a decision which is their’s alone to make subject to criminal law, contratual obligations, and compliance with the terms of Channel 5’s broadcasting licence. As regards the remark to Katie Wassail. Personally, I woudn’t consider this a joke at all as it wasn’t remotely funny and I think, regardless of what I am sure was benign intent, it was a serious error of judgement to make such a remark at all, let alone to a Jewish person. As regards the so-called “bi-phobic” remarks relating to AIDS, this was merely an opinion, one he is fully entitled to have and to express, indeed, there is some limited research to partially support his views: http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention...-hiv-diagnoses. I find it somewhat odd that people condemn him as being ignorant or misinformed without unequivocally being able to disprove what he believes - perhaps he has read this research case study and/or similiar ones and reached his own conclusions, which again, is his right; if indeed he is wrong surely this is a matter for education not condemnation, especially when as I said, there is some limited research to support his view. Simialrly, accusations of being a bigot without realising the irony of the accusers’ own position in denying someone the right to have a contrary view to their own…
Susan.Birtles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 07:06
Scots rool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Alba Gu Bràth
Posts: 125,163

It's a bit of a misleading title!

It's Katie's mum who has said he should be investigated by the police.
Scots rool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 07:11
topcat3
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,596
It's likely that Katie's mum does not know what was said yet.
topcat3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 07:20
jez37
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Belfast Northern Ireland
Posts: 709
Completely miss leading title.

As if the police haven't got anything better to do anyways.
jez37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 08:20
karl_kennedy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 639
A thread title worthy of a shit-stirring scumbag 'journalist' from the Sun or Daily mail....give your head a wobble
karl_kennedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 09:37
lulu g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 43,554
Well you have to laugh deary.
On no you don't!
lulu g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 09:39
dirtyrat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 792
He should be sent to 5 years hard labour somewhere
dirtyrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 09:40
lulu g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 43,554
Err...no, he isn't. Katie Wassail's mum 'called for a police probe' following an "antisemitic rant". Firstly, there was no such rant - he made a comment (whether ill-judged or otherwise) in jest, not a rant. Furthermore, there has been absolutely no offence committed - most certainly not one under Sections 4, 4A and 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which is the common grounds for prosecution for racially and religiously aggravated offences. Of course, a "joke" can be considered grounds for one of these offences (as per Paul Gascoigne, although I am 99% confident the protection against him will be dismissed), however, aside from mitigation of intent, likelihood to cause distress or alarm, level of threat and the environment, the footage wasn't broadcast and as far as I am aware no one has reported being "alarmed" or “distressed" who heard the remarks – a report of what was said is not sfficent grounds for consideration of an offence being committed let alone prosecution.
Outwth legal concerns, moral consideration is a different issue, one for the show’s production company (and ultimately Channel 5) to consider, arguably, a decision which is their’s alone to make subject to criminal law, contratual obligations, and compliance with the terms of Channel 5’s broadcasting licence. As regards the remark to Katie Wassail. Personally, I woudn’t consider this a joke at all as it wasn’t remotely funny and I think, regardless of what I am sure was benign intent, it was a serious error of judgement to make such a remark at all, let alone to a Jewish person. As regards the so-called “bi-phobic” remarks relating to AIDS, this was merely an opinion, one he is fully entitled to have and to express, indeed, there is some limited research to partially support his views: http://www.hivplusmag.com/prevention...-hiv-diagnoses. I find it somewhat odd that people condemn him as being ignorant or misinformed without unequivocally being able to disprove what he believes - perhaps he has read this research case study and/or similiar ones and reached his own conclusions, which again, is his right; if indeed he is wrong surely this is a matter for education not condemnation, especially when as I said, there is some limited research to support his view. Simialrly, accusations of being a bigot without realising the irony of the accusers’ own position in denying someone the right to have a contrary view to their own…
I'm not dismissing the rest of your post, in which you made several good points but, since the content in question wasn't broadcast, how do you know it was a jest in poor taste rather than an anti-Semitic rant?
lulu g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 10:24
angiekiershan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
Waste of police time and tax payers money ... Absolutely crap
angiekiershan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:19.