TV presenter Kirsty Gallacher has surprisingly defended Lewis Hughes, who was this week sacked from his job as a negotiator at Caplen Estates, and his friend, Jonathan Chew, after the pair featured in a video accosting Professor Chris Whitty in a park last weekend.
GB News viewers were left stunned yesterday after the TV presenter said that the two men who harassed the Chief Medical Officer for England ‘were not nasty’.
The pair were seen grabbing the famous scientific officer as he attempted to pull away and escape. At one point in the video, one of the men appear to try to put him in a headlock.
The 18-second video brought widespread criticism, including from prime minister Boris Johnson.
But the TV presenter on GB News had a slightly different opinion on the video, with Gallacher insisting that the two men were “not being very nasty” to the CMO in the clip, and that they were “clearly very inebriated”.
She added by telling viewers that she does not think the incident is “massively disturbing”.
Gallacher’s co-presenter Darren McCaffrey had a similar viewpoint on the video, adding that he didn’t agree with vaccine minister Nadhim Zahawi’s comments that the men were ‘thugs’.
“I don’t think they’re harassing him,” he said.
Gallacher and McCaffrey’s comments have not been well received on social media, with one viewer called for the former Sky Sports TV presenter to be sacked for defending the two men in the video, writing: “Kirsty Gallacher needs to be sacked for this!
“Being under the influence is not a defence.”
Comments (37)
Journalists often lack judgement and say unwise things. Pure and simple this is common assalt (even if without violence) and 2 men assaulting anybody is clearly unacceptable. Posting on social media will seal their fate and provide all the evidence needed. There are NO EXCUSES for this action be it drunk, ADHD or whatever. I believe common assalt is a criminal offence and these clowns may end up with criminl records as a result. This will wreck their carreers. Most professional bodies do not accept members with criminal records so this man/men may have made one serious misjudgement. Until the are charged and convicted it is for his employer to decide how this impacts his business. I guess most estate agents like to think of themselves as professionals – an unprovoked assault is not a good image for any professional company. Lawyers, judges or tribunals will decide in the end.
This daft pair of chaps would have stood a much better chance of a good selfie by simply acting professionally and requesting Professor Chris Whitty to stop for a second for a mutual selfie in appreciation of his work . . . handling and withholding him was totally unacceptable
Has Lewis Hughes been given all the attention for his part in this drunken aggression because he’s an agent?
There’s hardly a mention of the one with a grin like the muppet drummer or what he does, why is that?
He has a ‘Get out of jail free’ card, Robert.
Jonathan Chew “revealed that he suffers from ADHD and autism where “sometimes things seem a good idea and really they’re not”.”
No doubt any attempt to charge him with anything would release the fight-hungry dogs en masse. Teflon.
What I find mystifying is that they had uploaded the video to social media themselves. So they effectively dobbed themselves in showing a complete lack of brains, so they deserve everything they get.
Posters here and elsewhere seem to be assuming that this was a one off incident and totally out of character.
Was it ?
It might be that the individual has a history of ‘going out on the lash’ – ‘because he’s young’, etc, etc and videoing the distress they cause to innocent people.
It might also be that his employer knew full well the type of character he is, and that that suited their business model just fine. For all we know, they might have an office full of this type of person – who enjoy going out on the lash in the park of a weekend and filming their attacks on bystanders ?
An awful lot of ‘mights’ in there…and potential libel against his employers who have now been named too. Have a word with yourself.
Dick,
I wasn’t stating anything against him or his employers.
I personally think that the agent did the right thing – assuming, as others have already said, they followed the correct procedure in reaching their conclusion.
I was saying that there seems an awful lot of people – on here and elsewhere, passing judgement whilst using quite limited facts.
So none of us ‘grown ups’ ever did anything remotely stupid after a few beers eh? This pair have done something very, very foolish, thoughtless, lairy, and most unpleasant for Prof Whitty. Having sobered up Hughes apologised and I, for one, am prepared to believe that he is most likely genuinely regretful of his actions – not just because he realises he is paying a very heavy price. If it had been anyone other than a public figure involved the incident would have been ignored.
To start equating this storm in a teacup to something much, much more serious, as some have done, is indicative of how intolerant we have become of a relatively minor ‘offence’ that in the old days would have resulted in a copper giving them a stiff talking to – and if it had been our village bobby, a clip round the ear. And yes, I do know it isn’t the old days any more.
Charged with what? Being lads out on the ****? Do me a favour.
So I suppose that the excuse “I didn’t rape her because I was drunk” is acceptable in your world?
And that comment is why are streets are now often unsafe.
I am clearly baffled that there is any place for excusing these guys.
They may well have had a few drinks but clearly the opportunity for a selfie with a scientist with a national profile was too great for their small minds to cope with, in this social media obsessed society. They disregarded his own obvious fear at being suddenly manhandled and the pathetic notion that, had he complained, they would have released him, does not merit commentary.
I had never heard of Caplen Estates until this story broke. In my view the lad’s behaviour was gross misconduct that justifies instant dismissal for bringing his employer into disrepute. I have respect for that decision, and would not consider it unfair dismissal as most employment contracts have such provisions.
But for Kirsty Gallacher, to comment that she does not find such behaviour disturbing should, with her platform, cause her more than a little difficulty with her employers, assuming they have editorial standards that reflect the power of what their presenters, with their own media agenda, want to get away with to boost their profile.
You’re nearly 100% correct, except for the part about assuming GB News have editorial standards – Their only concern is how much they can be anti-common-ground/sense.
Make no mistake that in the event the bloke didn’t loose his job and Boris didn’t condemn it, GB ‘news’ would be all over it with statements such as: IT’S A DISGRACE or YOB ASSAULTS COVID CHIEF.
The bloke got sacked and probably rightly so, the company had no choice as is the way with SM spotlight nowadays. That surely is punishment enough, calling them scum and thugs is a bit strong, they are hardly terrorists or murderers, just pissed up idiots who will definately think twice before doing that again!
2 blokes, off their heads on drink or drugs, in a public park, in London, during the day imposing their physical will on any one at all, condoned by a mother who thought it acceptable to be 3x DDL at 11am while shopping with her children?
Call me old fashion but I don’t care much for Boris’s Britain
If I were walking through a London park and felt a couple of guys’ hands on my shoulders I’d be absolutely petrified. Common assault. How on earth can anyone be defending these pratts. It says a lot about how GB news is going to pan out as well.
Its not a news channel, its a shock channel. Say whatever to get a reaction like ‘LBC’Try and get the lower middle class wound up.
Why does everyone care so much what Kirsty Gallacher thinks??
GB News have just plummeted in my estimation
No doubt BOTH their mothers are proud of them.
Irresponsible people who do stupid things for 2 minutes of fame need to know their are consequences and those who support them need to consider public opinion very carefully
There is no way these scum would ever work in my company
assault
Pretty sure Kirsty got busted drink driving a little while back. No surprise she sees this as high jinx.
She did indeed. She committed the offence, admitted to it and took her punishment. Tell me what crime these two individuals have committed and been charged with.
They should be charged with breaking Covid social distancing laws and Section 4 (?) public order offence,
I don’t think Mx. Gallacher, or anyone else condoning the behaviour would have accepted two daytime drunks imposing the same man handling with the (distressed) calmness of Professor Whitty
Agreed, they should be charged and taken through the proper procedure. So why they haven’t been is a big question. It would send a clear message. We can all act as judge, jury and executioner but that’s not how this works.
Edited: Now appears that one individual has been charged with common assault. We’ll now see if a conviction sticks.
Well lets be honest, she did not really admit it she was caught bang to rights after putting herself and others in danger.
As for the crime of these two. Harassments, bullying verging on assault (putting your hands on another without permission).
Whitty is obviously a placid individual. If these two idots had done it a a different bloke in the street could have been a different story.
As for unfair dismissal, i doubt it. We like many other firms have a clause to in our contracts that cover social media and behavior outside the office. If they fall short or bring our companies name into disrepute from their actions it results in dismissal.
From your comments i guess you would feel the sales manager with hands all over the neg is just banter? and should not be taken so seriously?
You’re trying to infer I am defending their actions. You are incorrect. I, like many others, want to know why the judicial route has not taken its course. If it doesn’t, these men are not criminals and to assert otherwise would be libellous.
Edited: Now appears that one individual has been charged with common assault. We’ll now see if a conviction sticks.
I was quite shocked that Boris called them thugs – clearly they were massively lashed up…
But I don’t think this deserves the response that it’s got – and I really don’t think the chap should have been sacked!
High profile employment lawyer on TV yesterday stating it’s clear cut unfair dismissal, the employer has broken the law. Let’s see if we hear about the tribunal, if there is one of course.
Is it? Depends on the employment contract and many will have the ‘clauses’ that allows them to be summary dismissed. And now they have been charged by the police for assault.
If you are going to dismiss an employee, there has to be a process. Whilst it is always a matter of opinion whether the offence committed is sufficient to amount to gross misconduct (common assault would, to me, meet and exceed that bar) and thus immediate dismissal, there is still a process that has to be followed. That process should form part of the companies policies on employment.
I can’t help feeling that if Hughes were to go to tribunal for unfair dismissal, the matter may well hinge on whether proper process was followed rather than whether or not it was right for him to be dismissed.
Not for summary dismissal. Very fast to implement if the conduct presented (video in this case) is final and irrefutable ….. on your bike as far as an employer is concerned. The 3 stage process doesn’t get a look in.
Being drunk is not a defence for harassing someone! No he probably shouldn’t have been sacked, the manager was probably concerned about the image of the business more than the actions. Much like when you are at school, we were always taught that our actions outside of school reflect back on the school itself. For me it would be a final warning so there was no doubt that one step out of line and he would be gone legitimately. However accosting someone in public, grabbing them, dragging them about when they are clearly distressed and want to be left alone is bang out of order and they should face some degree of punishment. They may not be thugs in the traditional sense but they certainly need to grow up. As for GB News, I don’t think much of what they say is worth the paper it is written on and I very much doubt enough to sway public opinion in either direction.
Maybe SKY TV Sports could offer them a job working alongside Kirsty?
or FOX News in the US.