The BBC presenter who is alleged to have paid a 17-year-old tens of thousands of pounds for sexually explicit images reportedly made two “panicked” calls to the young person after the story broke last week.
In new allegations published in The Sun, the male presenter – who has not been named but is said to be a “household name” – called the young person to ask “what have you done?”.
He then allegedly asked the young person to speak to his mother and urge her to stop the investigation, the paper added.
The mother of the now-20-year-old also claimed she was “upset” by the wording of a BBC statement, and that no one from the broadcaster initially got in touch with her when she raised a complaint in May.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:00
BBC suspends unnamed presenter
The presenter, who was suspended by the BBC on Sunday, reportedly paid £35,000 for the photographs – the money of which, the mother has claimed, has been spent on a drug habit.
He allegedly first requested images from the youngster in 2020 when they were aged 17 and has made a series of payments over the years, according to The Sun.
The youngster’s mother told The Sun she saw a picture of the presenter on her child’s phone “sitting on a sofa in his house in his underwear”.
The mother said she was told it was “a picture from some kind of video call” and looked like he was “getting ready for my child to perform for him”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:30
What we know about claims against BBC star
In a statement, the broadcaster said it “takes any allegations seriously” and has “robust internal processes in place to proactively deal with such allegations”.
The BBC said that while it first became aware of a complaint in May, “new allegations” of a “different nature” were put to it on Thursday, adding it had been “in touch with external authorities, in line with our protocols”.
A Met Police spokesperson confirmed it had been contacted by the BBC but said “no formal referral or allegation has been made”.
BBC taking allegations ‘incredibly seriously’
In an email to staff on Sunday, director-general Tim Davie said the BBC was taking the allegations “incredibly seriously”.
He added: “By law, individuals are entitled to a reasonable expectation of privacy, which is making this situation more complex.
“I also want to be very clear that I am wholly condemning the unsubstantiated rumours being made on the internet about some of our presenting talent.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:33
Culture sec avoids questions on BBC scandal
“We are in contact with the family referenced in the media reports. I want to assure you that we are working rapidly to establish the facts.”
The corporation said it expected to be able to provide a further update in the “coming days”.
On Sunday, Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer said the BBC was acting “swiftly and sensitively”.
She had spoken to Mr Davie on the phone and tweeted: “Given the nature of the allegations it is important that the BBC is now given the space to conduct its investigation, establish the facts and take appropriate action.”
Premier League match tickets at Chelsea have been selling for more than twice the price of a season ticket on an American exchange website with a familiar director and investor to supporters – club chairman Todd Boehly.
Amid growing fan fury, Sky News was able to access the Vivid Seats platform on different devices last week from London – and saw tickets for the visit of Liverpool on 4 May, priced by Chelsea at a maximum of £80, being sold for between £537 and £2,666.
Some tickets were listed as being sold by traders.
Image: Chairman of Chelsea Todd Boehly. Pic: Reuters
Chelsea’s official website appeared to show no availability for this premium fixture, with the Blues battling for Champions League qualification and Liverpool potentially celebrating being crowned Premier League winners.
The most expensive Stamford Bridge season ticket for this campaign was £1,015.
Vivid is listed by the Premier League among “unauthorised ticket websites” with a message: “We would urge fans to exercise extreme caution when dealing with these websites.”
Image: Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain
The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust has written to the Premier League to ask that Vivid – given its ties with a club’s shareholder – “ceases facilitating the sale of tickets for significantly above face value”.
Mr Boehly – part of the consortium that replaced Roman Abramovich as owner in 2022 – has not addressed accusations of a “conflict of interest” or claims he is undermining efforts to combat ticket touting.
There are anti-touting warnings on signs in the streets approaching the stadium.
Image: Sky News found some tickets for more than £2,000 on Vivid Seats
An official Chelsea Ticket Exchange allows season ticket holders to sell their tickets “at the pro-rata price of season tickets” to a club member “in a safe, secure environment”.
While Chelsea’s website says to only buy tickets in the UK from official sellers, it adds: “Many of the websites that advertise and sell tickets online are not within the jurisdiction of UK law.
“This means, while we report these sites when we see Chelsea tickets on them, there is little we can do to shut down the sites.”
Image: Sign at Stamford Bridge warning against ticket touting
On Vivid, we did see warnings telling visiting users not to buy seats in the home sections and a pop-up eventually appeared after browsing the availability, saying: “Tickets for the EPL matches are not currently available for purchase in your location.”
No attempt was made by us to buy tickets. But should we have been able to see the listings at all?
Sky News first asked for comment from Vivid last Monday and continued to see ticket listings with variable prices in pounds during the week. It took until Friday night for any form of response.
“Vivid Seats respectfully adheres to the laws that are in place in the United Kingdom and is not in violation of any regulations around EPL tickets,” the email read in part. “As such, Vivid Seats’ policy restricts the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Image: Pic: Reuters
When Sky News checked the website again on Saturday the listings for Premier League matches were no longer visible as they are from outside of Britain.
Asked if they were no longer visible after our inquiries, Vivid’s official replied: “The conclusions that you are drawing are factually incorrect.
“We understand that people will try to find ways to circumvent technology and as such, we have validation protocols in place in order to restrict the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Again, Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain.
But the same official did not respond to an email detailing how we were able to view the tickets listings from London on separate days, without using VPN software that can make your browser seem as if it’s accessing the internet from another country.
Image: Chelsea’s match against Ipswich at Stamford Bridge. Pic: Reuters
‘It’s the only way I was going to get here’
Ticket exchange websites can be the only way for some fans overseas to come to matches.
When Ipswich played at Stamford Bridge on 13 April, Baz Gillespie was able to watch after 20 years living in Cyprus by paying a vastly-inflated £300 for two tickets on a website other than Vivid.
“The only way I was going to get here was that way,” he said, remembering the days he could just queue up and pay a fiver for a ticket.
The same match was Martin van Dijk’s first-ever game at the Bridge, having come from the Netherlands after paying €150 (£128) on another exchange website after initially trying through Vivid.
“If there’s no other option, and you want to visit, it’s the only way, but I’d rather get it through like the normal way,” he said.
Image: Chelsea fan Martin van Dijk paid €150 for a ticket on a resale website
‘An absolute disgrace’
It is the “normal way” that so many supporters want to protect and are aghast at Mr Boehly’s links to Vivid, predating his purchase of a stake in Chelsea.
“It’s an absolute disgrace,” supporter Ben Grey said. “He shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website. It’s unethical from a basic perspective.
“The club are coming out with communication saying that they’re against ticket reselling and our semi-majority shareholder [has a website] reselling tickets to our games.”
Asked what the Premier League should do, he replied: “I’m a massive Chelsea fan, I don’t want Chelsea to be hit hard by anything.
“But the fact of the matter is they need to sort that out and if they’re allowing there to be an owner of a club who’s reselling tickets, it’s a disgrace.”
Image: Fan Ben Grey said Mr Boehy shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website
‘Not a very good look’
Another fan, Rich Still, called it “21st century greed”.
The issue is resonating with young children.
Rhys Edwards, watching with his father, said: “It doesn’t look too good on Chelsea and their owners to be fair.
“Saying that [the website] is not authorised by the league they’re playing in isn’t a very good look.”
Officials with Chelsea, the Premier League and Mr Boehly declined to comment.
The Vivid statement to Sky News stressed: “It is important to note that Vivid Seats does not set the base price for tickets sold on its marketplace or receive any revenue from that base price; only the seller sets and receives the base ticket price.”
Image: Labour MP Rupa Huq has proposed a law change to improve pricing transparency
‘It’s like the Wild West’
Vivid highlighted to Sky News its “long-standing partnership”, including being a backer of a 2023 summer tour of the United States.
Chelsea’s website featured a quote saying: “We are pleased to join with a company committed to becoming the ultimate partner for connecting fans to the live events, teams and artists they love.”
The government has launched a consultation to prevent people from being ripped off in Britain by the resale of tickets.
The limit could range from the cost of the original ticket to a 30% uplift to stop the public being “fleeced” by professional touts.
Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton, Rupa Huq, has separately proposed a change to the law to improve pricing transparency on secondary ticketing sites.
“It’s an unregulated market,” she told Sky News. “It’s like the Wild West. It needs getting back into control.”
Gatwick is the UK’s worst airport for flight delays for the second year running, according to new data from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
After suffering from continued air traffic control (ATC) disruptions, departures from the West Sussex airport were delayed by more than 23 minutes on average in 2024.
In 2023, its flights were delayed by nearly 27 minutes – so the airport, which is the UK’s second busiest, has seen an improvement.
A spokesperson said the airport had a “robust plan” to improve things further in 2025, including a new method to separate arriving aircraft, and trialling the co-ordination of connecting jet bridges to planes remotely.
They said Gatwick remains “the world’s most efficient single-runway airport, with flights departing or arriving every 55 seconds”.
Gatwick was badly impacted by ATC staff shortages both in Europe and in its own control tower last year, which a 2024 report by the Royal Aeronautical Society suggested may be in part due to the pandemic.
It said staffing was reduced because of a downturn in traffic during lockdowns, and recruiting and training new ATC workers can take up to three years.
Julia Lo Bue-Said, chief executive of Advantage Travel Partnership, a network of independent travel agents, said passengers should expect better than “stuck in terminals” for hours “with little information or support”.
UK’s top ten worst airports for delays – ranked
10 – Cardiff Airport
Cardiff had average delays of 17 minutes and 36 seconds.
9 – Luton Airport
Luton recorded average delays of 17 minutes and 42 seconds in 2024.
That was an improvement on the year before, with the airport recording delays of nearly 23 minutes in 2023.
8 – Bournemouth Airport
Bournemouth also saw an improvement.
Despite recording average delays of 17 minutes and 48 seconds, it saw around a two-and-a-half minute improvement on the year before.
7 – Edinburgh Airport
Scotland’s busiest airport had average delays of 18 minutes and six seconds in 2024.
That was an improvement of nearly three-and-a-half minutes from the 12 months previous.
6 – Exeter Airport
Exeter, on the other hand, saw growing delays in 2024.
Last year’s data showed average delays of 15 minutes and 42 seconds at the airport.
In 2024, that figure jumped to 19 minutes.
5 – Teesside International Airport
Teesside also recorded longer delays of around two minutes on average.
In 2024, its departing flights were delayed by an average of 19 minutes and six seconds.
4 – Stansted Airport
Stansted recorded average delays of 19 minutes and 36 seconds in 2024, a 30-second increase on the previous year.
3 – Manchester Airport
The UK’s third-busiest airport came third on the list with average delays of 20 minutes last year.
In 2023, its delays were longer by nearly two minutes.
2 – Birmingham Airport
Birmingham saw delays of 21 minutes and 18 seconds.
Despite moving up the list, it improved its delay time by 12 seconds on the year before.
1 – Gatwick Airport
Gatwick Airport recorded delays of 23 minutes and 18 seconds, an improvement of over three minutes and 36 seconds.
At the other end of the table…
Belfast City airport recorded the best punctuality in the UK for the second year in a row.
Its typical delay per flight was less than 12 minutes.
The average delay for flights from major UK airports was 18 minutes and 24 seconds in 2024, down from 20 minutes and 42 seconds in 2023.
“Aviation continues to recover from the pandemic, and operates in an extremely busy, global environment with resilience challenges,” said a spokesperson for trade body AirportsUK.
“It is therefore positive that the data shows delays continue to come down as everyone in aviation works together to provide the best possible service to passengers.”