Receive free BBC updates
We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest BBC news every morning.
The Metropolitan Police has said that further inquiries are needed before it can decide whether to launch a criminal investigation into allegations that one of the BBC’s top presenters paid a teenager for sexually explicit images.
Detectives from the Met’s specialist crime command met with BBC bosses on Monday morning, but said afterwards that there was “no investigation at this time”.
In a statement, the Met said the detectives were “assessing the information discussed at the meeting and further inquiries are taking place to establish whether there is evidence of a criminal offence being committed”.
The BBC only informed the police on Friday, the day after being approached by The Sun newspaper ahead of a series of articles alleging that the presenter paid tens of thousands of pounds to a teenager, who was 17 at the time of the first payment, for sexual images.
The newspaper said the family complained to the BBC over the presenter’s behaviour in May, but that he remained on air until the mother provided details to The Sun last week. The presenter was only suspended on Sunday, leading MPs to question why it took so long for the BBC to act.
Downing Street said on Monday the allegations were “concerning”, but that the prime minister had full confidence in the broadcaster’s director-general.
The BBC boss, Tim Davie, will face fresh scrutiny over his handling of the latest scandal to hit the broadcaster when it publishes its annual report on Tuesday.
The broadcaster has come under attack over how much it knew about the allegations after the complaint in May, with MPs demanding an investigation into how the BBC dealt with one of its most serious scandals in the last decade.
Downing Street said: “Obviously, these allegations are concerning. The secretary of state [Lucy Frazer] spoke to the director-general yesterday and was assured that the BBC is investigating this matter swiftly.”
The House of Commons’ culture, media and sport select committee is also holding an emergency meeting on Tuesday as MPs debate whether to summon Davie to explain his handling of the crisis.
The cross-party committee is likely to hold a one-off session before parliament breaks for the summer recess in less than a fortnight.
One person familiar with the situation said the BBC was made aware of a complaint in May but that “what came last week was different”. They added that the original investigation had been “unsuccessful” in getting more detailed information.
The Sun has run a series of articles alleging that the presenter paid tens of thousands of pounds to the teenager for sexual images, beginning when the person was 17 years old, which may be in breach of the 1978 Protection of Children Act.
The presenter has not been named in the media over privacy concerns despite widespread speculation that has forced some BBC stars to deny their involvement.
The number of BBC staff party to the process has been tiny: over the weekend even extremely senior executives who work with the presenter were still debating the evidence about the identity of the person at the centre of the scandal.
In a memo to staff on Sunday seen by the Financial Times, Davie said that the BBC investigations team had been looking at the allegation since it was raised in May “and have been actively following up”. But he added that “new allegations, of a different nature, were put to us on Thursday”.
He said that by law, individuals are entitled to a “reasonable expectation of privacy, which is making this situation more complex”. The BBC’s investigations team is led by former detective Jeff Brown.
Senior BBC executives warned that these sorts of allegations are particularly damaging for the broadcaster. In 2012, it emerged that the late Jimmy Savile, who had been a BBC star for decades, was a serial sexual abuser and rapist. Not only did the BBC enable the late presenter’s behaviour, it cancelled a posthumous exposé of him in 2011.
The scandal was a major factor in the downfall of George Entwistle, then director-general.
One serving senior executive said that, if the nature of the current allegations was known, not suspending the presenter was “potentially totally explosive . . . A total failure to grip it. Classic BBC.”
One senior BBC executive said: “The question is who knew what, when and what did they do about it? And if that looks bad, it could have implications [for the director-general].”
