I really hope that nothing illegal or inappropriate has happened... that no-one's been groomed or exploited or abused. I don't think there's any way of knowing what's gone on at this stage on the basis of what's publicly available.

This whole situation is really difficult. On the one hand, we all know about celebrities who've used their fame to exploit and abuse, and to cover up and silence victims and witnesses. On the other, we know about false allegations and false memories and mistaken identities and rumours that have dragged reputations through the mud. The current situation where there's all this social media speculation about the identity of this person is deeply damaging and unfair to everyone involved.

We know we go wrong if we don't listen to victims, but we also know that we go wrong if we believe everything uncritically without corroborating evidence. Or just decide that just because someone's a bit of an oddball, they're a wrong 'un. Or that because someone's famous, they can't be. If suspects are named (formally or informally), that can be bad... if they're not, the rumour mill runs rife, and that's bad too. All this is just really difficult to get right.

There's something deeply suspect about the S*n and the reporting on this... any excuse for the Murdoch press to attack and smear the BBC and they'll take it. And it's particularly unedifying watching politicians (mainly Tories) piling in on this, as if Parliament hasn't been a hotbed of harassment for years.

But on the other hand, everything the S*n has said and done and written in the past doesn't automatically mean they're wrong this time. I mean, it calls their credibility and reporting and motivations into serious doubt. But I don't think that whether you're instinctively pro or anti BBC or pro or anti S*n should lead to taking sides on this one. We just don't know yet.