AIBU to think that The Saatchi Person is being just nasty now?

(71 Posts)
lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 21:00:26

HE says that Nigella and her daughter were both off their heads on drugs and in doing so, let the PA's run rings and spend money fraudulently. There is a case going on, so not sure if this will get drop kicked, but the man seems to know no depth to his nasty.
He'll be punching old ladies next.
Could there be any truth to it all? Did wonder on occasion why N's eyes looked quite as erm...wide awake as they did.
He is a vucker isn't he?

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 21:01:20
lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 21:01:46

will ye look at that. I made the linky do the pinky.

Darkesteyes Tue 26-Nov-13 21:36:44

Its a way of continuing his abuse of her even though they are now divorced. He is trying to blame the PAs actions on his ex wife.

scarletforya Tue 26-Nov-13 21:39:16

He is such a sore loser. Ugh.

EasterHoliday Tue 26-Nov-13 21:43:33

the alternative way of looking at it is that he has been incredibly dignified in the face of her refusal to publicly support him when he was looking up her nose for coke. Looking back at those images, I do really think his version of events is plausible.
She does however have remarkable skin for someone who is supposedly a decade-long addict.

ForalltheSaints Tue 26-Nov-13 21:44:55

I doubt his version of events. Let's see what the jury thinks after all the evidence is given.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 21:46:48

A friend of mine has quite rightly pointed at that his advertising agency was hardly a bastion of clean living. The Saatchi Christmas party was the stuff of legend even if it was stuffed by braying media types, many must be having a little chuckle to themselves.
Totally agree that this is frustration at her total refusal to be goaded by him after the whole business at the resteraunt.
HE really is an awful man

Easterholiday - do you reckon all the women with black eyes really did walk in to doors as well then hmm

I don't agree with the 'dignified' interpretation at all. Saatchi is an abusive man who accepted a caution from the police after photographs were taken of his hands round his wife's throat. She divorced him and he has waged a war of attrition against her ever since these events emerged.

I think Easter's post was tongue-in-cheek.

I hope it was!

Golddigger Tue 26-Nov-13 22:09:53

He was always going to play dirty.
He will want the control.

I am inclined to believe the Nigella drug taking bit I think. Even he wouldnt make that up I dont think. If he was blatantly lying, he would get found out I would have thought.
With something this major, it just about has to be true I would have thought.

Darkesteyes Tue 26-Nov-13 22:12:57

Nigella is 53 but looks 37 IF this is true (which i highly doubt) many who partake will want to know the secret of how she acheives this.

WorraLiberty Tue 26-Nov-13 22:16:10

Could there be any truth to it all? Did wonder on occasion why N's eyes looked quite as erm...wide awake as they did.

Isn't that ^^ almost as bad? confused

You've started a thread to say how nasty he is, but then you're trying to get strangers who don't even know her, to speculate?

SaucyJack Tue 26-Nov-13 22:16:52

I don't think he's done anything wrong on this one.

He made the comments about Nigella's drug use in a private e-mail to Nigella so it's very probably true.

He didn't ring the news desk at the Fail accusing her of being a coke head.

phantomnamechanger Tue 26-Nov-13 22:21:02

I think he is angry with her for not putting up with his abuse and is out to muddy her name like his has been.

I just can't believe that someone who always looks so glam and gorgeous, and 15 years younger than her age, could be an addict.

IndiansInTheFuckerLobby Tue 26-Nov-13 22:23:40

The fact is an unbelievable amount of these television folk are on drugs of some kind. A friend who works in the industry has mentioned all types involvement in it. Whatever the drug use, the domestic violence and manipulation of this man must never be excused!

Mymumsfurcoat Tue 26-Nov-13 22:24:15

Rich people falling out. I don't care.

tudorqueen Tue 26-Nov-13 22:32:41

I see drug addicts most days and I sure as hell have never seen one looking as good as she does!

He ran a successful advertising agency - he knows every trick in the book about marketing and he's marketing himself as the concerned husband.

He's an arsehole.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 22:36:01

Worra that was a teensy joke. sorry if it sounded otherwise. Didn't ask anyone to speculate.

spindlyspindler Tue 26-Nov-13 22:36:31

I love the implication in the press coverage that if she is a cocaine user it would in some way justify him grabbing her by the throat and making her cry in public.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 22:37:37

mymums I think this is more than rich people falling out. I think it is important to highlight the kind of controlling men that will use any tactic to hand to undermine someone who they think has got above themselves. Because she is rich, she somehow is less deserving or any compassion?

HumpdayPlus Tue 26-Nov-13 22:41:59

As opposed to when he was just being nice and holding her by the throat?

SeaSickSal Tue 26-Nov-13 22:42:27

Um, are people incapable of reading the link?

These allegations have been made by the defence barristers of the Grillo sisters, not by Saatchi. Presumably they have this email as it was uncovered during the investigation. He sent it to her privately.

So much as the man is a knob on this occasion it seems this is not his fault.

NadiaWadia Tue 26-Nov-13 22:46:26

She had an apparently loving and normal marriage to John Diamond, the father of her children, who seemed to be a good man, and who tragically died of cancer. It is very sad both for her and her children that she should then end up marrying this nasty piece of work.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 22:47:00

seasick but the email was penned by him, so he is responsible for the comment. So how did the barrister get a hold of the email? Would that mean that it isn't admissible if sly tactics were used to obtain it? That is a question not something else. If that makes any sense. Has he any control over what the barrister use if it was a private email? He must have given permission for it to be read out.

Molly333 Tue 26-Nov-13 22:58:39

No matter what that man says in his need to punish nigella it will never take away from the horrible images of him assaulting her. Like a typical abusive man this isn't the end , I've had seven years of it! We've been divorced six and he's remarried yet he continues

SaucyJack Tue 26-Nov-13 22:59:07

But why would he have passed the e-mail over to the defence, if he didn't genuinely believe it to be true? As far as this case goes, he is the victim. It would completely and utterly against his interests to be aiding the defence team.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 23:03:48

saucy that is what is confusing me. Perhaps they are saying that her lack of control made the decision to charge the with fraud flaky as she is unlikely to remember very much.

thecatfromjapan Tue 26-Nov-13 23:05:22

I think any speculation on how this e-mail might have, rather suddenly, surfaced (in a trial that started rolling a good long time ago), and what purposes it may be serving, and any inducements to its incorporation in the "defence" that may have been deployed, are unpublishable on mn at this point in time.

However, I don't think it's difficult to come up with various scenarios.

For me, I just think that there is no excuse for throttling your partner. The more I think about all this, the more grim (and angry) I feel.

SeaSickSal Tue 26-Nov-13 23:06:17

Lola, it's the subject of a police investigation. Anything the police discover in that investigation has to be disclosed to the defence.

There's no reason to think he has anything to do with this being revealed and he wouldn't have had to give permission as it is evidence in a criminal trial.

What he wrote was in private. The Grillo's have made it public. And as SaucyJack says it is very unlikely he would assist the defence.

The blokes a class A nob and there is no excuse for his violence but this doesn't appear to be his doing.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 23:10:43

seasick and cat thanks for that. I shall speculate no further on the whys and wherefores. but I feel so sorry for her. true or false, she has had enough crap handed to her from that tosser and when is enough enough?

SeaSickSal Tue 26-Nov-13 23:11:27

What they are saying (again all in the link) is that she had a class A, class B and prescription drug habit and the Grillo's knew about it. And that Nigella allowed them free reign to use her card in return for them not telling anybody about it.

If you read the body of the email it's clear that the Grillos were already using this defence before the email was sent and they are merely using it as corroboration.

Anniegetyourgun Tue 26-Nov-13 23:17:55

Hmph, my ex-husband said I was on drugs for psychosis. He even had the packet to prove it. Except it was a load of rubbish. He did indeed have a packet of drugs which had been prescribed for me a few years earlier (yes, this man kept everything), for a short-term bout of vertigo; the main ingredient, I forget what it was, but according to his little drug book it had in years gone by been used in much stronger doses as an anti-psychotic. It was kind of like assuming you have an STD because you are taking penicillin. The bit about having discussed my mental problems with the GP was pure fabrication though. And he said it all in front of the DCs.

The moral of this story, children, is never believe what an ex writes in an accusatory email.

ShirakawaKaede Tue 26-Nov-13 23:25:46

Saatchi is an abuser, and regardless of how much he was behind these accusations, he nevertheless stirred the pot - and I find the suggestion that her alleged drug taking was the reason behind HIM grabbing her by the throat a disgusting example of victim-blaming.

Also, it was the judge who allowed the accusations to be publicly disclosed - was that necessary, considering that they were unproven?

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 23:28:59

Interesting point shira i
Annie I use an anti epileptic as a mood stabilizer. many drugs have cross over purposes that when viewed in a dim light or a very narrow light can be seen to be something they are not. I would sincerely hope that such a suggestion would be thoroughly tested by the other barristers.

AnandaTimeIn Tue 26-Nov-13 23:40:29

I am neither suprised or shocked to find out Nigella Lawson enjoys getting high.

He on the other hand gives me the creeps.

lolaisafuckertoo Tue 26-Nov-13 23:45:30

We can all get high if we want. that is our choice. sad that these scum bags are flinging it around in a desperate attempt to get themselves out of obvious fraud and what have you.
he is beyond creepy I don't know how to even give a bench mark for his creepiness.

"But why would he have passed the e-mail over to the defence, if he didn't genuinely believe it to be true? As far as this case goes, he is the victim. It would completely and utterly against his interests to be aiding the defence team."
Depends. I could easily imagine he is more interested in hurting Nigella and exerting control over her once again, than he is interested in these PAs being found guilty. All they took from him was money from his account, whereas she took herself from his control.

My first thought when I heard it on the news was 'bastard just won't let her go, will he?'.

lolaisafuckertoo Wed 27-Nov-13 00:04:17

Where totally adds up if you look at it from the nasty corner of his mind

YetAnotherFucker Wed 27-Nov-13 00:06:12

She doesn't present as stupid. Allowing the sisters to run riot with a credit card from her husband's company to avoid them exposing a drug habit would be a remarkably stupid thing to do.

springytickly Wed 27-Nov-13 00:19:51

What I don't get is how this is the top news story today on all the channels.

If Delia Smith was on coke, would it make the top story? this is not a top news story (even if nothing much is going on in the world today). I can see it would be in the shuffle but not the top.

Monty27 Wed 27-Nov-13 00:25:16

The truth will out itself, speculation is arduous.

JoanRanger Wed 27-Nov-13 00:25:28

Um, isn't the order of events:

- email sent
- legal case/research starts against Grillo sisters
- episode outside Scotts
- divorce
- Grillo sisters trial starts, using evidence that predates the whole throttling thing?

Depressingly predictable example of nasty media mainpulation. Abusive mega-rich husband plays dirty over divorce case, and attempts to destroy wife's reputation and business.

revivingshower Wed 27-Nov-13 00:54:09

I like Nigella and have noticed the name of the person she allegedly over paid before in her books. Maybe she wanted to pay them the amount they got paid. Aren't they both multi millionaires so they could afford a lot.

Wahtawah Wed 27-Nov-13 00:57:13

Why has this email been made available to the press pre-trial?

MistressDeeCee Wed 27-Nov-13 01:12:32

He's a physical and emotional abuser. Even now theyre apart, he wants to continue his emotional abuse. Its an insult to a pig, to call this man a pig. Vengeful, horrible waste of space. None of what he or his defence says changes the fact that, he was pictured holding Nigella by the throat. I dont think he'll come out of this looking well at all. Not that this will stop queues of women falling at his & 'charisma', eh. Sad all round, but at least Nigella's away from him

Depressingly predictable example of nasty media mainpulation. Abusive mega-rich husband plays dirty over divorce case, and attempts to destroy wife's reputation and business.

BohemianGirl Wed 27-Nov-13 03:48:30

Entirely inappropriate he has attempted to damage her daughter in all this; reading more deeply he is also attributing to his own daughter telling him that Nigella was taking drugs.

oldnewmummy Wed 27-Nov-13 03:49:53

Reading the BBC story, it says he only discovered the drug use as they were splitting, and in the email it refers to the sisters' claims being proved right. So it sounds like the defence claims and the choking incident pre-dated the sending of the email, therefore it could well have been sent as a form of revenge on Nigella.

DuckToWater Wed 27-Nov-13 06:29:38

I imagine he's at least massively exaggerating any drug use. If she was a coke/amphetamines addict she'd be scrawny and not interested in food.

paxtecum Wed 27-Nov-13 06:31:46

Coke use and rich people are often a combination.

Nigella may well have a problem with coke.
It is a very more ish drug.

I would be very surprised if Charles Saatchi has never taken it.

Some people lie about or block out their past.
I did coke with a friend of a friend at a party (where 98% of people there were doing coke). I knew for a fact that she did coke every weekend.
Three years later she telling everyone that she had never, ever taken coke. Hmmmm.

paxtecum Wed 27-Nov-13 06:35:51

Duck: I knew coke users who are quite big.
It messes about with your metabolism.
Diego Maradonna isn't scrawny.
Kerry Katona is /was never scrawny.

The catering industry is renowned for drug use - keeps people going during the very long hours.

DuckToWater Wed 27-Nov-13 06:50:56

Yes good point - I hadn't thought about them! But Nigella looks healthy, not a bit like DM or KK did.

SatinSandals Wed 27-Nov-13 07:31:06

Regardless of whether she has a coke habit or not he seems out to get revenge and a highly unpleasant character.

cory Wed 27-Nov-13 07:36:08

Even assuming that this were true (which I doubt), what it would strongly suggest would be that the two employees were blackmailing her. Difficult to see how that is a point in their favour or why they have been advised to use that at their trial. Surely it's just inviting prosecuting counsel to ask some very unpleasant questions?

But what it boils down to is that we are supposed to take the word of two (self proclaimed) blackmailers and an abusive ex against that of a woman we don't know anything against.

JoanRanger Wed 27-Nov-13 07:50:39

Pretty much everyone in the London media world does coke to some extent. I honestly wouldn't be massively surprised if it were true. Saatchi's an unpleasant individual but I'm still not sure that he orchestrated this release – he was saying a few weeks ago that he would reveal something and then he pulled back and didn't. This release was by the defence for the two PAs, no? Who are defending themselves against Saatchi/Nigella?

I'm not justifying the throttling at all, just saying that I don't think this was necessarily meant to be public as many people think. I like Nigella's writing but even being a nice person doesn't preclude taking a bunch of blow.

Ages ago I remember reading a Stephen Fry essay (probably, in hindsight, written when he was taking a bunch of recreationals) in which he said that a UK TV channel had once done a documentary about "middle class junkies" which had to be shelved because they all seemed too healthy and fine. Not everybody looks like Zammo out of Grange HIll.

Golddigger Wed 27-Nov-13 07:53:54

This is no doubt a naive question. But why would they do it, assuming they so? Because everything is so high powered, and fast pasted, and heavy stakes?

SatinSandals Wed 27-Nov-13 08:08:25

Insecurity is my guess, underneath they don't feel they match up to their outer persona. They also have the money, they feel it is glamorous and they like to be the 'in' crowd. They put it down to high powered etc because it is more of an excuse.

JoanRanger Wed 27-Nov-13 08:29:33

Hmmm, so he gave a written statement when it was clear the email would be used in court, which includes:

"I did believe the allegations" (note past tense)
"On reflection I was simply speculating that the Grillos would use this material to defend themselves."

Is it just me or does that actually suggest he's actively trying to limit the impact of the email and backtrack on its contents? I would imagine they have some choice things to reveal about him too.

SeaSickSal Wed 27-Nov-13 08:35:41

I stand corrected as it does seem from reports this morning that he is cooperating with the defence.

It will be interesting to see at the trial if they have anything to back this up or if it's just a horrible ex and two disgruntled ex employees smearing her. Although there is never any excuse for what Saatchi did.

I hope it's not true, I have a real problem with parents who take drugs.

horcruxmanzini Wed 27-Nov-13 08:56:20

He certainly seems to have all the PR skills of a powerful fan set on reverse.

revivingshower Wed 27-Nov-13 10:00:35

I hope nigella didn't do this but if he were a loving husband why didn't he notice something was wrong. Why didn't he help her with the drug problem when it came out rather than throttling her.

tobiasfunke Wed 27-Nov-13 10:16:41

I think Charles Saatchi is a twat and maybe he made it up or someone else did and he believed them.

However, I'm just not getting the whole it's ok if Nigella took lots of illegal drugs in front of her kids because she's so fragrant and luffly and cooks lots of nice buns on telly and he's such an arse.

Maybe he was pissed off she was, or he thought she was, taking drugs in front of his child as well.

lizzzyyliveson Wed 27-Nov-13 10:28:35

But I thought the last story from Saatchi was how horrible Nigella was being to Saatchi's daughter by not taking her to NY with her and not being in contact with her after the split? He can't have everything his way but he sure is trying.

ohtanmybum Wed 27-Nov-13 11:02:20

This is the pre-trial phase and the court reporters were amazed that the judge did not impose reporting restrictions, apparently. And it's not just the the tabloids salivating over this tat, it was all over the DT - but we've got the press we deserve and they'll pick over every desicated bone of this unedifying and sleazy saga because it sells.

Nancy66 Wed 27-Nov-13 11:15:09

there were reporting restrictions - they were lifted by the judge yesterday.

ohtanmybum Wed 27-Nov-13 11:33:14

I stand corrected - my level of ignorance indicates my level of interest.

CarpeVinum Wed 27-Nov-13 12:05:25

Um, isn't the order of events:

- email sent
-* legal case/research starts against Grillo sisters*
- episode outside Scotts
- divorce
- Grillo sisters trial starts, using evidence that predates the whole throttling thing?

It would seem not.

First the Grillo sisters case starts, no mention from their legal team of drugs.

Then the abuse goes public. Divorce follows.

October the email gets sent.

Third party hands statement of Grillo sisters making drugs allegation against NL to prosecution. Court calls allegations scurrilous and not allowed to be reported

Sacchti says he believes Grillo sisters innocent, that they had NL's unspoken? permission to spend like mad. Bad character thingie allowed in court meaning allegations can be reported.

Basically the drug stuff, email and all, appears to have popped up only after the public abuse, the admission of abuse in the form of accepting a caution, NL divorcing Satcchi, Sacctchi's threat to sue NL for... not sticking up for him, or something and NL's counter threat to pull put of the Grillo case as a witness for the prosecution for the Grillo's

Nobody has done a nice tidy bullet point timeline as far as I have seen, but they are "innocent face" underlining the distinctly .... interesting.... sequence of the events.

So upshot, not a whisper of drugs untill after NL divorces Satcchi and fails to crumble in the face of all his previsouly widely reported tactics to try bring her to heel.

pincasgft721 Sat 30-Nov-13 20:49:01

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now