A second allegation is made and rumours are still spreading like wildfire - the BBC must name their man now

Had the BBC's top managers handled this horrible situation more sensibly from the very beginning, perhaps it wouldn't be necessary. 

But it has been a mess and badly dealt with since they were first contacted by the worried parents of the young man involved in the first accusations.

That was long before any members of the public became aware of what has turned into a story that is gripping the nation - and before the second set of allegations about threatening messages being sent to a different young person emerged, and further accusations about breaching lockdown rules to meet at 23-year-old. 

They had weeks to deal with this in a safe and fair way. That would have not only protected the image of the corporation that pays their generous salaries but - far more importantly - the reputation of the many completely innocent presenters who have been dragged into this grubby affair.

Who was thinking of them when they chose to hide one person's identity, no matter what the enormous repercussions on others whom they employ?

The sad fact is, innocent or guilty, most of the country already knows the identity of this 'household name'. It isn't just known by everyone at the BBC and journalists across the country. It is the first name on the lips of shocked mums as they meet at the schoolgates and he is the main topic of discussion in pubs across the land.

That's without even mentioning the speed at which the presenter's identity set social media on fire over the weekend. To think this man still has privacy and to keep hiding behind that is a joke ... a nasty, twisted joke which is making nobody laugh. And it is not just we who believe he should be named - media heavyweights Jeremy Vine and Piers Morgan also understand that transparency is paramount in this situation.

None of us knows if there is any truth behind either set of allegations or if any law has been broken. But the vast majority of us know the face behind it all.

This man must be given a fair hearing and that appears to grow less likely every day the malicious rumours are allowed to grow.

The second set of allegations surely changes everything when it comes to pretending he is still anonymous? The privacy defence and any pointing back to rulings previously made in court but not set in law are surely over at this stage. Those ships have sailed ... as has any chance of privacy and - many would say - any right to privacy against two sets of serious allegations when in a high profile, well rewarded role of public influence.

It is now time for the BBC to step up and name the presenter. Let's not forget they are completely funded by the public, paid for by people who have no option as to whether they contribute or not.

It is time they did the right thing for everybody and stopped doing what they seem to do best, making their own problems a million times worse by poor judgement calls from the very top.