Nigella Lawson "attacked by husband" at Restaurant

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2525757/Nigella-called-fantasist-Im-not-Im-not-shopaholic-liar-insists-aide-accused-spending-580-000-designer-sprees-holidays.html

I do think 10 designer dresses and 6+ designer handbags could well have been bought without the knowledge or consent of the Saatchis. Nigella has been very generous as an employer , was there an ulterior motive behind it.???

Getting boring now.

Trials about two thieves thats all.

I don't think so Lioned, Nigella can kiss goodbye to an American Contract and she and Saatchi have come across as a couple of spendthrifts when they could have been doing something worthwhile with their wealth.

I was only reading a couple of days ago that it is always the poor and middle class who are the most generous in times of catastrophes around the World, the mega rich the meanest. This pair indulge themselves and if the Sisters are to be believed Nigella has set her children no standard.

What the pair off them doing going down her bag yeah.


They can't get any lower now the defence can they, using her kids.


It is only about the two thieves , they stole money ....what nigella does is nothing to do with anyone but her.


It quite surprising how low lawyers can go to get their clients off and WHO is paying for their defence anyway?


Who bought this case to court anyway...see, even that has got lost in all this drama.

kitti wrote:What the pair off them doing going down her bag yeah.


They can't get any lower now the defence can they, using her kids.


It is only about the two thieves , they stole money ....what nigella does is nothing to do with anyone but her.


It quite surprising how low lawyers can go to get their clients off and WHO is paying for their defence anyway?


Who bought this case to court anyway...see, even that has got lost in all this drama.

Morning kitti, it was Saatchi who brought the case to Court. The witness said she used to have to change bags for Nigella which was how she came to see the evidence.,which was also seen in the Bathroom. I think it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. These Sisters were employed for several years , yet only a few months ago was it decided to sue them. It appears no one checked on their expenditure before and even the Accountants said it wasn't their responsibility to query expenditure. Ms Wasserman, who lived for a time in Battersea working for Nigella and is her Assistant is apparently responsible for over £300,000 of the expenditure but is not being charged. Because of the Plaintiffs involved i would think any Legal Firm would be happy to work on a no win no fee basis
. That Household was a mess by any standard .

Slightly off topic ... is it just me or does Saatchi always look as if his hair needs a good wash.   Surely he can afford the shampoo... with all his wealth.  .

Breaking News: The Jury did not reach a verdict yesterday , one of the Sisters is not very well, Judge says understandable, but she can stay in another room while the Jury meets this morning to try to reach a verdict.

Both sisters NOT GUILTY

Duncan Bannatyne ‏@DuncanBannatyne 5m

The Grillo Sisters have been found not guilty of robbing their rich employers. The court costs will be paid by the poor UK taxpayer!!




Disgusting if true

They'll make a packet with an 'exclusive' in The Sun!!

wjk wrote:They'll make a packet with an 'exclusive' in The Sun!!

Thanks wjk, actually I think the Plaintiff pays the costs , his and the Defendants when he loses. I don't blame them if they want to make money, they were employed for several years and Nigella knew they were using the card , Saatchi sued to bring out all the dirty washing IMO.

Nigella facing new drugs probe: Police say they will review decision not to investigate TV chef over cocaine and cannabis use
Miss Lawson now faces prospect of being interviewed under caution
She admitted using drugs at fraud trial of her former aides the Grillo sisters
She claimed she had taken drugs on a few occasions and was not an addict
Police said Friday they would not be investigating the allegations
Now it emerges they will examine evidence with crown prosecutors
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
PUBLISHED: 02:00, 22 December 2013 | UPDATED: 02:00, 22 December 2013
17 shares 21View
commentsPolice are to review their decision not to investigate Nigella Lawson over her cocaine and cannabis use
Police are to review their decision not to investigate Nigella Lawson over her cocaine and cannabis use

Police are to review their decision not to investigate Nigella Lawson over her court admission that she used cocaine and cannabis, Scotland Yard announced last night.
The TV chef now faces the prospect of being interviewed under caution by officers over evidence she gave at the trial of her former aides the Grillo sisters, in which she revealed she took cocaine several times and smoked cannabis.
On Friday, after the Grillos were found not guilty of defrauding Miss Lawson and Charles Saatchi, the Metropolitan Police said they would not be taking the matter any further.
A statement was issued saying: 'At this stage the Metropolitan Police will not be investigating these allegations.'
However last night, in what has been described as a 'dramatic about turn', officers announced that they would be working with the Crown Prosecution service to decide whether to take matters further, the Sunday Telegraph reports.
A police spokesman said: 'Should any evidence come to light that can be investigated further, we will review this decision.
'A specialist team from the MPS will nevertheless examine all the evidence emerging as part of a review into this matter and in conjunction with the Crown Prosecution Service, will determine an appropriate way forward.'
Miss Lawson admitted to the court that she had used drugs on several occasions, but she insisted she was not an habitual user.

More...
How Saatchi used his own daughter to ruin Nigella: Ruthless ploy to get the teenager to help expose wife's 'daily drug habit'
Mafia past of Nigella aides' father: Mobster Michele Grillo was jailed for 15 years for brutally kidnapping fashion designer's sister
Wrath of the domestic goddess: As aides are cleared of fraud, Nigella's fury at being made a 'ridiculous sideshow' in court
However the Grillo sisters claimed she had taken cocaine nearly every day and that she had even allowed her children to smoke cannabis.
They said Miss Lawson had let them spend what they liked in return for keeping her cocaine addiction and heavy cannabis use a secret from her husband.
Miss Lawson was forced to admit to using illegal drugs at the fraud trial of her former aides Elisabetta Grillo (left) and Francesca Grillo (right)
Miss Lawson was forced to admit to using illegal drugs at the fraud trial of her former aides Elisabetta Grillo (left) and Francesca Grillo (right)
Today the Mail on Sunday revealed that Mr Saatchi's former wife Kay and their daughter Phoebe released a statement claiming that Ms Lawson had used drugs 'regularly and heavily each night'.
The incendiary document claimed Ms Lawson would take drugs every night for 'an hour after dinner, and another hour before bed', and that she would even ask staff to prepare cannabis joints for her to smoke while her husband was asleep.
Miss Lawson, 53, categorically denied she was a habitual drug user claiming she had been vilified and that allegations of her drug taking were a 'ridiculous sideshow'.
Miss Lawson said she had used Cocaine to cope with ¿intimate terrorism¿ from Mr Saatchi
Miss Lawson said she had used Cocaine to cope with 'intimate terrorism' from Mr Saatchi
Commander Stephen Watson told the Sunday Telegraph: 'We will use specialist resources from within the Metropolitan Police Service to examine all the evidence which emerged as part of a review into this matter.'
Referring to the Yard's earlier statement in which they said they would not be investigating, he added: 'Frankly, I don't think the full colour of the Metropolitan Police Service's position was conveyed in that statement'.
Miss Lawson told the court that she had taken cocaine of seven occasions - six times to cope with the death of her first husband, John Diamond, and once to cope with what she described as 'intimate terrorism' from Mr Saatchi.
She said she had used cannabis this year to deal with a 'summer of abuse'. As well as smoking joints in front of the children, Miss Lawson said she used cannabis to help her sleep. But she repeatedly denied ever being 'off her head' with drugs.
After her first husband's death she did not take the drug again until 2010 when she claims she turned to it because she felt 'isolated and in fear'.
She said a friend gave her cocaine three years ago and she took it again - but only once.
She told the court: 'The idea that I am a drug addict or habitual user of cocaine is absolutely ridiculous.'
She was also forced to deny that pictures of Mr Saatchi grabbing her by the throat and tweaking her nose at a London restaurant showed he was checking her for traces of cocaine.
Elisabetta Grillo also suggested that Miss Lawson smoked cannabis in front of her children, one of whom is under the age of 18, a matter which if proven, could be investigated by social services

This is totally ridiculous. So, Nigella used cocaine? So what? I've seen people whose names would be recognised using cocaine in a government building. As for smoking cannabis in front of her child who was under 18, cannabis is probably the least harmful of the drugs that I've heard, from reliable sources, that are on offer to kids a lot younger than 18. In my opinion, cannabis is a lot less addictive or harmful than most prescription sleeping medication.

Is everyone who said they once used an illegal drug to be investigated? The chargeable offences are possession, supply and intent to supply. Nigella would have to be found in possession of illegal drugs or the police would need to show "just cause" to search for them on her person or on her property. I think the press should now leave Nigella alone. I'm not a fan of her TV shows, but I do think she should now be left in peace.

Perhaps the police could turn their obvious concern for the welfare of minors towards the parents of other less fortunate children... ie. Madeleine McCann whose parents wouldn't even eat and drink in her presence, preferring instead to abandon her while they jollied with their friends.

AnnaEsse wrote:This is totally ridiculous. So, Nigella used cocaine? So what? I've seen people whose names would be recognised using cocaine in a government building. As for smoking cannabis in front of her child who was under 18, cannabis is probably the least harmful of the drugs that I've heard, from reliable sources, that are on offer to kids a lot younger than 18. In my opinion, cannabis is a lot less addictive or harmful than most prescription sleeping medication.

Is everyone who said they once used an illegal drug to be investigated? The chargeable offences are possession, supply and intent to supply. Nigella would have to be found in possession of illegal drugs or the police would need to show "just cause" to search for them on her person or on her property. I think the press should now leave Nigella alone. I'm not a fan of her TV shows, but I do think she should now be left in peace.

It's obvious the press have turned on her, but AnnaEsse I think she might go to the Court of Human Rights because she was only meant to be a Witness, not the accused. A Barrister says she has that option , but the Judge tryng the case believed that information was integral to the case because the Sisters allegation was that Nigella let them buy personal items on the Company Credit card to keep their mouths shut. Nigella said in Court that she took Cocaine 7 times with her Husband , if the Girls say she is still snorting she has lied in the Court. I have no sympathy for either of them.

Panda wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:This is totally ridiculous. So, Nigella used cocaine? So what? I've seen people whose names would be recognised using cocaine in a government building. As for smoking cannabis in front of her child who was under 18, cannabis is probably the least harmful of the drugs that I've heard, from reliable sources, that are on offer to kids a lot younger than 18. In my opinion, cannabis is a lot less addictive or harmful than most prescription sleeping medication.

Is everyone who said they once used an illegal drug to be investigated? The chargeable offences are possession, supply and intent to supply. Nigella would have to be found in possession of illegal drugs or the police would need to show "just cause" to search for them on her person or on her property. I think the press should now leave Nigella alone. I'm not a fan of her TV shows, but I do think she should now be left in peace.

It's obvious the press have turned on her, but AnnaEsse I think she might go to the Court of Human Rights because she was only meant to be a Witness, not the accused.  A Barrister says she has that option , but the Judge tryng the case believed that information was integral to the case because the Sisters allegation was that Nigella let them buy personal items on the Company Credit card to keep their mouths shut. Nigella said in Court that she took Cocaine 7 times with her Husband , if the Girls say she is still snorting she has lied in the Court. I have no sympathy for either of them.

Panda, whether she is still snorting or not is irrelevant to the case which was before the court. There was a story a while back about the traces of cocaine found in House of Commons toilets. Nigella is not the only celeb snorting cocaine and she probably has company in that activity by at least some of the people who regularly walk the halls of our parliament.

It's a disgrace that these two greedy women will make more money thus making her children's life more unbearable ....



What the pair off them doing anyway looking through her bag...her credit card ?


I see the pairs lives haven't been splashed all over the papers....too boring for the Sun?


Not juicy enough?

kitti wrote:It's a disgrace that these two greedy women will make more money thus making her children's life more unbearable ....



What the pair off them doing anyway  looking through her bag...her credit card ?


I see the pairs lives haven't been splashed all over the papers....too boring for the Sun?


Not juicy enough?

I think those sisters took advantage of Nigella's vulnerability. They were more than happy to take money from her to ensure that the celeb chef was not exposed as a drug taker. They spent quite a few years with their hands happily in Nigella's wallet and made the most of it. Maybe it wasn't fraud, but it wasn't decency and integrity either.

AnnaEsse wrote:

kitti wrote:It's a disgrace that these two greedy women will make more money thus making her children's life more unbearable ....



What the pair off them doing anyway  looking through her bag...her credit card ?


I see the pairs lives haven't been splashed all over the papers....too boring for the Sun?


Not juicy enough?

I think those sisters took advantage of Nigella's vulnerability. They were more than happy to take money from her to ensure that the celeb chef was not exposed as a drug taker. They spent quite a few years with their hands happily in Nigella's wallet and made the most of it. Maybe it wasn't fraud, but it wasn't decency and integrity either.

They are thieves who took money without "express permission" they can count themselves extremely lucky to get away with it,and frankly they can probably thank saatchi for that who's aggressive tactics using the Court room (and media) as a forum to wash his dirty linen clearly persuaded a few of the jury to cock a snook at him rather than deal with the real issue of dishonesty.

If the sisters persist with their personal attacks in the media they will have to be very careful,they will not be so lucky if they have to deal with Nigella in a Civil Court.

Don't know why they think the police will get involved....heresay that's all it is.


As for the husband, noticed he played the victim in all this, he brought this lawsuit against the sisters for one reason only...spite..I bet the clause was.....don't mention me in all this and don't blacken my name.....are those children his by the way because if they are, he should be ashamed off himself and no doubt the oldest one will never forgive him for what he has done to his mother, still, hope it was worth it


Women who scorn......men are far worse and vicious.....that's what you get for divorcing an abusive husband.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturevideo/tvandradiovideo/10533305/Nigella-Lawsons-orgasmic-advert-for-The-Taste.html

What did that American Journalist call Nigella's presentation in her Cookery Programmes.........Gastric Porn.  

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5352775/charles-saatchi-love-boat-trinny-woodall.htmlhim

Didn't take him long did it.!!!

Panda wrote:http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5352775/charles-saatchi-love-boat-trinny-woodall.htmlhim

Didn't take him long did it.!!!

I don't have a Sun account Panda, can you copy and paste please...