Nigella drug use

In my case they are , have a damn sight more money than me .
So they are different !
chuckle

Nigella Lawson and Charles Saatchi are no different to us. In situations of extreme emotion like the situation of the broken marriage and trial of members of their staff and despite all the PR management in the world (them not us!), still act in ways and say things that nobody would advise them to do or say.

PR managers can only do so much, faced with investigative journalism or just the tittle tattle of gossip columns information about people is published that does not go through PR agencies. And most of us are aware enough of their work to see through it to the unvarnished information behind it.

For example long before the marriage breakdown and court debacle I had formed the impression that Charles Saatchi was a control freak and that that control freakery probably extended to behaviour within his marriage. I made no judgements on the marriage. But nothing of his recent behaviour has surprised me.

It amazes me that two people as rich and successful as Nigella and Saatchi couldn't see what a car crash this case was going to be, and that whoever won no one would come out of it well..
I was interested to see that David Wilson's comments were so in tune with some of my own feelings. I heard Saatchi talking about his weird eating habits and the fact that he never ate Nigella's cooking and my first thought was "That's a good way to keep a successful woman in her place!" His habit of being too reclusive to deal directly with other people is exactly what my DH does and I know it is completely false and just a good way of making everyone dance to your tune.
To use one of my mother's favourite expressions - He's not someone you'd invite into you house.

I quite agree with your comments FlicketyB.

Of course we all get impressions of the people we know, either personally or through the media.

What I was saying is that I prefer not to make JUDGEMENTS, especially based on stuff I hear/read during a high profile court case like the one we've just had with Lawson/Saatchi.

I prefer to proceed with caution based on my view that I'm not going to know everything that goes on and some information doing the rounds won't be true.

It was a bitter war between Lawson and Saatchi and both had skilled advisors telling them what to do and say, what to wear and so on.

I just don't like to be manipulated. I'm the same with political propaganda.

I thought the police had already made a statement about not going to prosecute or investigate N's alleged drug use.

When Saatchi gets his claws into someone he doesn't give up and he too has friends in high places. Personally I would rather they didn't waste my money on a prosecution, if Nigella wants to kill herself with drugs so be it.

I do feel sorry for her now since it looks as though she may be investigated for drug use. All such a mess.

No one has suggested it isn't, but equally I am free to disagree with her - and she with me.

Petallus was putting forward her of view !!

IT IS ALLOWED < YOU KNOW

I'm on team FlicketyB about her post at 15.08 today. Thanks Flickety for putting it so well.

According to the DM, Saatchi and the accused shared the same PR advisors!!

Petallus your assumption of the high moral ground is done with great panache but I would imagine it is quite lonely up there.

To suggest that everything ever published about anyone is likely to be so misleading that we cannot even hazard a guess about what that person is really like, may apply when someone is suddenly catapulted into the news from of no interest to abiding interest, usually with an agenda, is one thing. But when a couple have both individually and separately been a focus of press interest for years and when you add the information released through the publicity of a trial, it is perfectly possible to reach some reasonably based conclusion about what they are like as individuals, while not specifically believing every story published about them.

If we only reached judgements on those we knew personally our knowledge of our fellow beings would be minimal. Everyday I come in contact with people; shop assistants, the postman, even distant neighbours. I do not know them but I reach conclusions about them; that they are kind, thoughtful, unpleasant, unkind, prejudiced, it varies but to share a few words with someone, pass the time of day, have a brief natter on the doorstep and keep a mind as ignorant as if they were an unrecognisable face in a photo is imposible.

Lets face it as Gransnetters we reach conclusions about other Gransnetters from their posts and most of us have never met or have a clue what the others look like.

I feel rather sorry for the children !
[

It is known that Lawson has a team of 'media image advisers' now working to salvage her image. She also is said to have powerful friends, many of them in the media.

I am sure it's the same with Saatchi.

Since I don't know either of these two high status and powerful people personally I prefer not to make judgements on either of them.

Nellie I agree.

My son always says "You can save face, and you can save your a*se, but you can seldom save both at the same time". I think that is very true in this case for all concerned.

I am annoyed by all the "why are the police not investigating her drug taking, it's one rule for the rich one for the poor" crap.

When so many celebs etc, in the UK have admitted to such misdemeanors in their past, there is nothing then police can sensibly do with regard to such historical allegations and admissions. I don't have much sympathy for either her or her ex.

Here's the link:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2527373/Saatchi-couch-One-Britains-leading-criminal-psychologists-analyses-advertising-genius-obsessed-public-image.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

This is why the case against the sisters failed: "It was never clear exactly how much Francesca and Elisabetta Grillo were accused of spending. Estimates of around £300,000 to £700,000 were mentioned, but such was the lack of oversight of spending of household spending that nobody could be sure what was spent on behalf of family members and how much the sisters had spent on themselves". So the evidence to convict them of fraud just wasn't there.

The sideshow of the drug using allegations was a distraction, and a great pity. Lots of people have immense difficulties in their lives and they don't self-medicate to get through them. Nigella has everything going for her, I hope she now does the dignified silence thing and gets her life back on track.

I have read Pro.David Wilson's article this morning it's very enlightening Saatchi is not a person I would ever wish to be involved with in fact I feel sorry for him and the kind of existence & lifestyle he has.I think he must be a very lonely man.

Professor David Wilson has written an insightful article about Saatchi's personality and behaviour in the DM. It's rather sensationalised, as is his way when talking to media (he's more circumspect when at his usual work), but nevertheless a good assessment of him.

No she wasn't on trial Merlotgran, but it she says it felt like she was. When reading about the cross examination of Nigella Lawson, and the summing up by the Judge and Defence Barristers, I was reminded of the way in which women who are witnesses in trials where men are accused of sexual or domestic abuse are treated. The focus shifts to attempts to undermine, humiliate and blame the victim, rather than have the alleged offender defend their behaviour. Nigella's statement about the way the court process has impacted on her, and her children was calm and considered. I wish her well

You can't exactly invite the whole family along to have their say.

Nigella was not on trial.

Witnesses often indergo rigorous cross examination and not that many have the Prime Minister on their side.

I agree it's a shame about the children.

And what about all the newspaper headlines that stated allegations as if they were facts both before and throughout the trial. Being accused in the witness box is not a fair trial and her kids had no say in the whole mess

Nigella did have an opportunity to defend herself in the witness box.

I feel sorry for Nigella, as well JessM, and her children. I expect the dreadful sisters will now be writing newspaper articles and books about their experiences. The trial has been very unpleasant, and none of those involved come out particularly well. I do feel for Nigella, to have her personal life described in such a nasty manner, with no opportunity for her or her children to defend themselves. She was absolutely right in her comments that she felt she was on trial, rather than the defendants.