Gregg Wallace

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Blue Maverick said:
Ha ha scraping the barrel you asked for examples I gave them to you, you dont like been proved wrong then, you said they don’t exist, so your argument is wrong, again tell me why the woman making false accusations had not been made to pay up? I know full well what Wallace is been accused of you are the one twisting the narrative.
Click to expand...
Stop being a sexist pig , men like you would kill him if he harrassed your wife or daughters in their workplace but dont give a shit about others
 
domalino said:
Which only happens because instead of accepting culpability for their actions, rich powerful people weaponise the court system to make it impossibly expensive to seek justice and make it as traumatic an experience as possible as a way to discourage other claimants.



There’s so much wrong with this statement.

1) No one destroyed his life or career. He’s not even been an actor for 20 years and this was over a 1 episode cameo return.

2) The accuser gets the same anonymity he did. He chose to make the allegations against him public, so if people decide to stop buying his Brie because they think he’s a sex pest, that’s all on him.

3) The police not being able to prove a 27 year old allegation doesn’t mean the accuser lied.

4) ITV studios are allowed choose to believe the accuser and their own internal HR investigation even if the evidence isn’t enough for a criminal conviction.

5) You’ve invented the idea the accuser was female. Wilson doesn’t know who it was.

Essentially you’ve heard a one sided sob story sold to the Sun and chosen to believe every word of it, then invented some details of your own to suit your own prejudices (assuming it was a woman, assuming it was a false accusation).
Click to expand...
1. Did you watch the video about the stress he was under about been accused.
2. Pretty sure his accuser knows him but he doesn’t know their identity.
3. Well who is lying then?
4. They had no investigation and they lied about been contacted by the police to come to that conclusion, so they terminated him on a lie, he lost out financially as well.
5. Have you watched the video? The complainant said he put his hand up her skirt!
So yes it’s a woman. No invention, suggest you go back and watch the video.
 
Blue Maverick said:
1. Did you watch the video about the stress he was under about been accused.
2. Pretty sure his accuser knows him but he doesn’t know their identity.
3. Well who is lying then?
4. They had no investigation and they lied about been contacted by the police to come to that conclusion, so they terminated him on a lie, he lost out financially as well.
5. Have you watched the video? The complainant said he put his hand up her skirt!
So yes it’s a woman. No invention, suggest you go back and watch the video.
Click to expand...

To be honest I’m not that interested in watching a video of a guy telling his side of a story with zero fact checking or input from the other side. It was bad enough enduring reading the written interview on the suns website which didn’t mention the skirt.

Although given this guy is neither rich nor famous and sells cheese for a living, where does that fit in with your belief that all of this is done for money? His accuser got no financial benefit.

As for the others (2) Yeah and the fact he was accused by someone was kept confidential until he announced it to the world. (3) Statistically probably him (4) He’s welcome to publicly sue the production company if he thinks he’s been wrongfully terminated and get all the details out in public. He’s chosen to go on holiday instead.
 
Last edited:
Mr Kobayashi said:
Career over. Divorce and bankruptcy hopefully.

The guy is an absolute cock. Talentless man of limited intelligence, a bully boy and get the impression he is someone who loves degrading people by acting like the runners etc are his servants and he is royalty.
Click to expand...
The divorce; let’s see.
I vaguely recall reading an interview with him a few months ago in the Saturday edition of The Times magazine. He made some surprising comments about his partner in that, and about how he organises their home life, and about his attitude when she said she wanted a child (which I think can be summed up as, if you want but don’t expect me to have much to do with it). It was all a bit odd.
 
domalino said:
To be honest I’m not that interested in watching a video of a guy telling his side of a story with zero fact checking or input from the other side. It was bad enough enduring reading the written interview on the suns website which didn’t mention the skirt.

Although given this guy is neither rich nor famous and sells cheese for a living, where does that fit in with your belief that all of this is done for money? His accuser got no financial benefit.
Click to expand...
So you come on here accusing me of something without even watching what I put on, I took you for better than that. She got no benefit because it went nowhere because he didn’t do it, I’m sure some fancy solicitor would’ve been all over it had it gone to court. Meanwhile he’s lost thousands in fees trying to get it sorted.
 
domalino said:
To be honest I’m not that interested in watching a video of a guy telling his side of a story with zero fact checking or input from the other side. It was bad enough enduring reading the written interview on the suns website which didn’t mention the skirt.

Although given this guy is neither rich nor famous and sells cheese for a living, where does that fit in with your belief that all of this is done for money? His accuser got no financial benefit.
Click to expand...
he may have bought her off with a truckle of cheddar?
 
domalino said:
Which only happens because instead of accepting culpability for their actions, rich powerful people weaponise the court system to make it impossibly expensive to seek justice and make it as traumatic an experience as possible as a way to discourage other claimants.



There’s so much wrong with this statement.

1) No one destroyed his life or career. He’s not even been an actor for 20 years and this was over a 1 episode cameo return.

2) The accuser gets the same anonymity he did. He chose to make the allegations against him public, so if people decide to stop buying his Brie because they think he’s a sex pest, that’s all on him.

3) The police not being able to prove a 27 year old allegation doesn’t mean the accuser lied.

4) ITV studios are allowed choose to believe the accuser and their own internal HR investigation even if the evidence isn’t enough for a criminal conviction.

5) You’ve invented the idea the accuser was female. Wilson doesn’t know who it was.

Essentially you’ve heard a one sided sob story sold to the Sun and chosen to believe every word of it, then invented some details of your own to suit your own prejudices (assuming it was a woman, assuming it was a false accusation).
Click to expand...

There's an irony in some of these people accusing the Wallace complainants of being after money, citing the plight of a man who was sold a story to The Sun, for money.
 
Mon Autre said:
There's an irony in some of these people accusing the Wallace complainants of being after money, citing the plight of a man who was sold a story to The Sun, for money.
Click to expand...

These false accusations are all about money, to prove it, here's this example of someone who made an accusation and never sought any financial benefit!

A cynic would also point out the big sob story interview he sold to the Sun also happens to just be coinciding with the announcement of him him going on tour doing some live cooking show.
 
Blue Maverick said:
So you come on here accusing me of something without even watching what I put on, I took you for better than that. She got no benefit because it went nowhere because he didn’t do it, I’m sure some fancy solicitor would’ve been all over it had it gone to court. Meanwhile he’s lost thousands in fees trying to get it sorted.
Click to expand...

Hey, I went to the fucking Sun's website, that's going above and beyond as far as im concerned. Not my fault they did a shit write up of their interview and didn't mention the skirt, but apologies for wrongly saying you made that up if it is in the video.

The thing is, even if I watch the video, I'd be treating it as the one sided story of a guy attempting to sell an interview and tickets to his new show, whereas you're taking every word he says as fact, so we'd still not agree.
 
Last edited:
domalino said:
Hey, I went to the fucking Sun's website, that's going above and beyond as far as im concerned. Not my fault they did a shit write up of their interview!.

The thing is, even if I watch the video, I'd be treating it as the one sided story of a guy attempting to sell an interview and tickets to his new show, whereas you're taking every word he says as fact.
Click to expand...
No im not I was pointing out how one side it can be against men, everyone is taking sides against Wallace when he’s not really been allowed to put his side forward. Yes I know he’s done some daft tik toks but I reckon he’s that stressed and hitting back without thinking, I’m not condoning what he’s done but if the world is against him you can see why he’s been how he is, probably better advice of his PR company wouldn’t go amiss. As for going to the Suns website I suggest deleting your history.
 
Blue Maverick said:
No im not I was pointing out how one side it can be against men, everyone is taking sides against Wallace when he’s not really been allowed to put his side forward. Yes I know he’s done some daft tik toks but I reckon he’s that stressed and hitting back without thinking, I’m not condoning what he’s done but if the world is against him you can see why he’s been how he is, probably better advice of his PR company wouldn’t go amiss. As for going to the Suns website I suggest deleting your history.
Click to expand...

How is the world against him though? The biggest tabloid in the country just paid for his story and as far as I can tell made no attempt to push back on him or fact check him.
 
I thought everyone knew that convictions for sexual assult and rape is tiny , the women involved open up themselves to hatred and death threads by men in particular . Cases are difficult to prove , just because that happens it does not mean the woman lied , there is very rarely a prosection against them for lying because the judge doesnt think they are

Only women haters cry why arent the women being jailed for lying , very sad to see there is a poster demanding it , it is the same every time , sad

Back to wallace , there was a woman on this morning who was a judge on a panel with him for six years and confirmed his bad behaviour, she said already social media had turned on her and she was getting death threats and men saying they are going to rape her

The women have a lot to lose , it is fuck all to do with money
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Everywhere on social media he is being called a nonce, pervert , creep, endless memes. Everyone’s laying into him.
Not defending him, just saying the world against him isn’t a far cry from the truth.
Click to expand...

You are the ghost of Max Clifford and I release you from your eternal penance advocating for disgraced celebrities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top