India knight still at the Times?

[Greenthomson]

Writing about her idyllic Christmas..I had no idea about her husband, is she still with him?

I have messaged them about it. Shocking that they're using that evil creatures name!

I used to enjoy her writing many years ago, but this is just horrifying. Clearly the Times don't give a shit but it's incredibly disappointing that they continue to give her a platform.

Well done for resurrecting this thread as it maddens me that this disgusting pair think they've got away with it.

I see that Beauty Pie ad with her quote on it and it enrages me. I will contact them I think.

And no surprise her daughter has gone trans. Desperate cry for attention. Also how interesting re that Tavistock/sex offender stat. That poor girl must be SO screwed up.

Just a reminder that India Knight didn’t abuse anyone.
I get that she is standing by her husband and therefore can be argued that she is normalising /enabling but she did not commit this crime. It’s another example of a male crime and male sexual deviancy.
Are we saying that people related to criminals should be fired? or not allowed in public life? I wouldn’t do what she has done, I do judge her but it’s a dangerous principle that people connected to abusers should suffer further by losing their careers?

@ArseMenagerie no one is saying she has committed the crimes, but she has condoned them. She has chosen to stay with him despite his conviction.

And yes, I don't think a paedophile defender should retain a position as an"influencer" in a national paper.

He’s scum and so is she for staying with him. Vile.

Are we saying that people related to criminals should be fired? or not allowed in public life?

No. No one can help who their relations are or what their relations do; however, if you stand by and support a relation following the most despicable, repulsive and morally reprehensible of crimes then yes, you should be harshly judged.

He is not a relation as such - I dont think they are married? But a person she is choosing as a romantic partner, and apparently has chosen to live with him over her own child. Then in her columns she is sitting in high judgement on all and sundry such as older women who date men in their twenties (characterised by her as “desperate” or women struggling with the menopause, while never acknowledging or explaining this huge issue in her own life.

I am keen for her to retain her independent earning power certainly, it would be awful if she could not leave him. But I don’t understand how she or the Times can imagine it is appropriate to print her advice on how to have a cosy kitchen valentines dinner at home, in her rotten circumstances.

Also while I agree his behaviour is not her responsibility she did allow his legal
counsel to use their relationship as a mitigating factor to keep him out of Prison:

“Mark Shelley, representing Joyce today, told the court: "The pre- sentence report gives his background, his time in the army, time as an MP, then something happened and it all imploded.
"A clever, hard-working man, taken to drink, and his life is destroyed by behaviour you have seen in his previous convictions.
"Since that time, he has given up drinking, found a partner that he loves, she loves him and they have made a life together””

As the judge also said his was not a victimless crime. His viewing and downloading of child sex abuse images fuels the abuse itself. But he and India seem to think it is fine to sweep this under the rug and for her to go on hectoring and criticising others in her columns without a single mention of any repentance, reflection or any consideration of these children.

She is not innocent in this. Her providing strong mitigation of portraying him as a settled loving partner kept him out of prison. Him being at her house meant her daughter now son had to move out. She literally gave up her daughter to keep shagging a peadofile. You can definitely pass judgement on that and so should those giving her a platform to make judgement on others and portray a certain life style.

I woud agree with this if she were a good journalist and a good writer. But she's not. She's smug, mediocre, tone-deaf, uncreative and is also a twitter bully. Given all this, it feels like The Times is going out of the way to keep her employed. Which, given how many talented young WC journos out there who can't catch a break, sticks in the craw.

Has anyone read her column dated 1st Jan 2023: 'Getting through the hard times makes a marriage?^'. Does she by any chance detail her own current marriage's 'hard times'?

I mean, I can only assume she is in an abusive relationship of coercive control.

His crimes are not hers of course and a woman shouldn't be vilified for a man's disgusting criminal behaviour

So I have to draw that assumption because the alternative is to accept that IK condones EJ's abhorrent crimes against children and well, she can't do?

Can she?

I condone her for her choices and her enabling the very worst sort of criminal @ArseMenagerie

She disgusts me, and it disgusts me the Times allow her to pass judgment on others and get paid for it.

@Perfectlystill do you mean condemn her rather than condone her?

I wondered that too. Predictive text I presume and hope.

Beauty Pie are STILL using her name. I guarantee none of the customers know
Who she is and what she lives with. Also the influencers. They'd drop BP like a hot brick.

Perfectlystill's post is clearly a typo.

BeautyPie should know better.

She said once that all Scottish people were racist. Every single one of them. Although I suppose that would make her partner a racist peado.

Are we saying that people related to criminals should be fired? or not allowed in public life? I wouldn’t do what she has done, I do judge her but it’s a dangerous principle that people connected to abusers should suffer further by losing their careers?

I think it depends on the circumstances, however I would question anyone who stayed with a partner who did this. Obviously if they were a childminder it would impact their job.

Yes, she's been put out to pasture by the Sunday Times (which I can't imagine would have gone down well) but she's got a beauty book coming out soon, advising people how to make the most of their looks...

One reason I cancelled my Times subscription is because they still employ this person. I still remember their non-coverage when her husband was in court in 2020 for taking an indecent image of a child. Shameful, craven behaviour. God knows what she'd be doing for income if it wasn't for her stepfather.

She still writes a cookery column for the Times. I think their cosmetic advertisers copped on.

She’s still writing a joke of a beauty column too. Presumably she’d be loathe to give that up as her supply of free expensive products would dry up.

Ah, explains a lot. Had vaguely heard of her, what a twat. BTW how the fuck is murdoch still alive, isn't he like 105?

India Kinght is a massive faux cretin who tries way to hard to fit in with the Islington crowd

Her real name is Gisele Aerstens and she was hooked up a drunken Labour MP thug - Eric Joyce - for a long time