Okay, my mistake, i misinterpreted it. To be fair with BBC, they point out in the title and article that this is just some transcript of someone anonymous, and they try to tie each allegation with reports from other sources to back up their likeliness. I guess it's the best you can do with someone anonymous ? Revealing the company, dates, or town might compromise the anonymity. I have this low-key uncomfortable feeling of "well, there's nothing that proves it" with most anonymous reports i read or hear, even when it's for events that are common otherwise.