egafd.com

Nigella and ex lose the case. If her ex hubby went to the police, was it a convoluted way of him getting back at her. After all he got a lot of flak for putting his hand round her throat. Maybe he knew the case would be lost and her reputation would be dragged through the mud.

If Nigella went to the police what was she thinking? Has she lost the pot. Obviously her mind would have been clouded by drug use. Herself and her family have had their reputations ruined. All for less than a million quid. At least Nigella has got her fortune to fall back on.

cockneygeezer2009 wrote:

> Nigella and ex lose the case.

They didn't "lose the case". It wasn't a private case. The Prosecution failed to convince a jury to convict. Nothing to do with her or him.

If her ex hubby went to the
> police, was it a convoluted way of him getting back at her.
> After all he got a lot of flak for putting his hand round her
> throat. Maybe he knew the case would be lost and her reputation
> would be dragged through the mud.
>
> If Nigella went to the police what was she thinking? Has she
> lost the pot. Obviously her mind would have been clouded by
> drug use. Herself and her family have had their reputations
> ruined.

Really? Doesn't seem to have affected her in any meaningful way. Saw her on telly today (obviously pre-recorded but the TV company didn't think she was ruined enough to remove her, which could easily have been done) and her American deal remains unaffected.

>All for less than a million quid.

Do you think there should be a limit before a case goes to court?

At least Nigella has
> got her fortune to fall back on.
>
Charles Saatchi is not exactly short of a few bob.

I think the IR might be able to tax the actual amount these 2 chancers spent on themselves as income tax.They are not out of the wood yet.There seem to be no winner in this case.

The sniping in the media at this unfortunate woman really needs to be stop !
At some point her marriage was happy but sadly that ended in divorce, with
its full barrel of recriminations and bitterness, earlier this year. Then she
appears as a Crown witness only to spend 10 hours in the dock and have
her reputation and life put under the microscope while - it seems to me -
the two sisters on trial are largely ignored !

Obviously she is wealthy. Obviously her ex-hubby is even richer. People
wallow like pigs in a trough over the fact that she spends ?25,000 on Donna
Karen or the same on flowers. But that's what the really rich do - spend their
money - and since it is their money what fucking business is it of others to
sneer. Are the rest of us so bloody perfect ?

Finally, the drug business. So she smoked joints occasionally. Well surprise,
surprise, so do zillions of others. And if she had a cocaine habit it seems to
have been a small one and nothing for the rest of us to get too
sanctimonius about !

She can cook my dinner anytime !

"Saw her on telly today (obviously pre-recorded but the TV company didn't think she was ruined enough to remove her, which could easily have been done) and her American deal remains unaffected."

If you was taking cocaine would you want people to know. Also the revelation true or not that she took drugs with her kids makes her look like a bad mother. I agree that taking drugs can boost your career if you are in the public eye.

"Really? Doesn't seem to have affected her in any meaningful way."

Nigella is not happy about the trial and the press coverage that went with it.

"Do you think there should be a limit before a case goes to court?"

No but you seem to be saying bad publicity is good publicity.

"The sniping in the media at this unfortunate woman really needs to be stop!"

Don't think anyone is sniping. She's the one who went to court and said she took illegal drugs. Nigella is not unfortunate either. She's just made some bad decisions, which we all do.

Spot on Frank. She is a really good looking woman for her age and as an admirer of women with curves she remains someone i admire.

cockneygeezer2009 wrote:

> "Saw her on telly today (obviously pre-recorded but the TV
> company didn't think she was ruined enough to remove her, which
> could easily have been done) and her American deal remains
> unaffected."
>
> If you was taking cocaine would you want people to know.

Didn't you assume that people in TV/media take cocaine anyway?

Also
> the revelation true or not that she took drugs with her kids
> makes her look like a bad mother.

There's the nub ? true or not.

I agree that taking drugs can
> boost your career if you are in the public eye.
>
> "Really? Doesn't seem to have affected her in any meaningful
> way."
>
> Nigella is not happy about the trial and the press coverage
> that went with it.

That's what she is saying publicly. A letter from her lawyer to national newspapers would indicate otherwise.
>
> "Do you think there should be a limit before a case goes to
> court?"
>
> No but you seem to be saying bad publicity is good publicity.
>
Well the censorious Americans haven't cancelled her show so they obviously don't regard it as that bad publicity.

"Then she
appears as a Crown witness only to spend 10 hours in the dock and have
her reputation and life put under the microscope while - it seems to me -
the two sisters on trial are largely ignored ! "

I don't follow your logic here Frank. The Grillo sisters were accused of defrauding Nigella Lawson and Saatchi. The main defence used by the Grillo sisters was that Nigella Lawson authorised their spending in return for the sisters keeping quiet about her drug habit.

Therefore, the key part of the case had to be about whether Lawson had a drug habit. This is why both the sisters and Nigella Lawson were questioned so extensively on this.

As we know the lifestyles of the rich and famous are extremely bizarre to the vast majority of the population, but when ?76K a month is being spent by two personal assistants you might have thought someone in the household might have spotted it.

BUT, by heck she's fucking fit, ain't she !