Jim Davidson ‘threatened to beat up Linda Nolan’s husband’ over Frank Carson

[Pete.]

Jim Davidson and Linda Nolan have been at loggerheads since they first stepped into the Celebrity Big Brother house and now the reason behind their deep-seated animosity has emerged - Jim allegedly threatened to beat up Linda’s late husband in 1995 after he was caught on camera stealing from Frank Carson’s dressing room. Carson being Davidson’s late best friend.

An insider revealed: ‘Jim blew his top when Linda’s husband was caught. He was playing up the road and he came down and went ballistic. He got right up to him and wanted to beat him up. He was yelling, “No one steals from my mates”.

‘Linda and others got the two apart then Linda had him thrown out. Jim was not happy as he was used to going where he pleased in Blackpool. I don’t think he’s ever got over it.’

Jim got the nation guessing when he alluded to an incident in Frank Carson’s dressing room on Thursday night’s show, much to Linda’s upset and disgust.

It then materialised that Linda’s late husband Brian Hudson, who died of liver failure in 2008, pleaded guilty to stealing £20 from Carson’s wallet in his dressing room at a Blackpool nightclub back in the day.

However, even now Linda is insistent that Brian was no thief and only confessed to the crime because of the damage the ongoing furore was having on their family.

Speaking to Lee Ryan on last night’s show, she said: ‘Money went missing and my Brian was accused. He went to court for it and he pleaded guilty.’

Another source added to The Sun: ‘Money was going missing every night from Frank’s wallet in his dressing room.

‘Secret cameras were installed and they caught Linda’s husband red-handed. It was highly embarrassing for Linda. He never explained why he had done it.’

CBB continues tonight at 9.45pm on Channel 5. Lionel became the third housemate to get the boot on last night’s show.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/01/18/jim-davidson-threatened-to-beat-up-linda-nolans-husband-over-frank-carson-dressing-room-theft-celebrity-big-brother-grudge-explained-4267721/

The Metro spilling the truth tea

[Cherie]

What would you have done?, given Brian a pat on the back and an extra 20 for stealing from a charity fund and sent him on his way :laugh:

[Kazanne]

What would you have done?, given Brian a pat on the back and an extra 20 for stealing from a charity fund and sent him on his way :laugh:

I'de have done the same tbh,If Jim had stolen from charity boxes can you imagine the grief he'de have got on here.

[Black Dagger]

yawn

[flamingGalah!]

Good on Jim, I would have given the tealeaf a slap too...

[MrWong]

I'm surprised. I thought he only liked hitting women.

[MTVN]

Dont really see how an objective newspaper report can be described as 'spilling the tea'

[Livia]

... However, even now Linda is insistent that Brian was no thief and only confessed to the crime because of the damage the ongoing furore was having on their family....



Oh yeah, that'll be why he confessed....................

A lot of people in Jim's position would have reacted in the same way.

[Patricia4]

I'm surprised. I thought he only liked hitting women.

Yes that is what most people are saying about Jim but no he will hit men too.

[Kizzy]

That's because he's an aggressive bully...

[flamingGalah!]

Oh yeah, that'll be why he confessed....................

A lot of people in Jim's position would have reacted in the same way.

He couldn't really deny it when he was caught red handed ON CAMERA, the dirty tealeaf :nono:

And Linda is making things worse by LYING about it & claiming he was innocent. I never get this 'don't speak ill of the dead' notion, doesn't seem to apply to Jimmy Savile does it :joker:

[arista]

That's because he's an aggressive bully...


Yes but he never beat him up.


Empty Threat

[joeysteele]

Oh yeah, that'll be why he confessed....................

A lot of people in Jim's position would have reacted in the same way.

Clearly the Nolans and co are not people who like to be caught out as to anything.
He,her husband, confessed because he was shown video evidence taking the money from Frank Carson's wallet, he claimed he was only borrowing it.

Do people borrow from others by just taking money out of their wallets without their permission.I think not.
He confessed because he had no other choice thanks to the camera evidence which had reportedly been set up because other amounts had gone missing from Frank's wallet previous to that incident.

Linda Nolan can squirm all she likes but it is becoming clearer why she hates Jim in the house as to what he knows.

[Z]

Linda can't accept what her husband did because she doesn't want to. She'd rather gather up her humiliation, embarrassment and anger and aim it all at Jim for adding to the embarrassment because they're in the house together and both Frank and Brian are now dead, Jim is the only other person still alive involved in that situation. She probably hates him because he got himself involved unnecessarily and opened up the situation to other people, she'd have probably preferred if it had been dealt with privately, of course.

I can understand why Linda hates Jim but I think she needs to let go of it and really deal with why she hates Jim on her own time. She shouldn't hate Jim. She should make peace with what her husband did and move on from it, it's been nearly twenty years.

[Josy]

That's because he's an aggressive bully...

Yeah because it couldn't possibly be anything to do with the fact that he was pissed off because someone had been robbing his best friend and charity.

[Suze]

An insider is the same as a source I take it? So we only have word of mouth that happened unlike there being evidence of the actual theft on camera, yes?

[Northern Monkey]

I'd have knocked him out if he'd robbed off one of my mates.

[Sophiee]

I'm surprised. I thought he only liked hitting women.
:laugh2:

[GiRTh]

If Jim vehemently pursued a prosecution while Linda is in denial that the incident was even serious then the level of her hatred for him is starting to make sense.

[Amy Jade]

I disagree with stealing obviously and I understand both sides to certain extents but the way Jim brought it up to try and upset Linda was seriously horrible and uncalled for.

[bez87]

Wow lol the guy got caught red handed and then tried to cover it up by saying he was borrowing the money and linda believes him what a joke lol, what else are you going to say when your caught red handed lol plus if he was innocent then you plead innocent.

[Josy]

Linda can't accept what her husband did because she doesn't want to. She'd rather gather up her humiliation, embarrassment and anger and aim it all at Jim for adding to the embarrassment because they're in the house together and both Frank and Brian are now dead, Jim is the only other person still alive involved in that situation. She probably hates him because he got himself involved unnecessarily and opened up the situation to other people, she'd have probably preferred if it had been dealt with privately, of course.

I can understand why Linda hates Jim but I think she needs to let go of it and really deal with why she hates Jim on her own time. She shouldn't hate Jim. She should make peace with what her husband did and move on from it, it's been nearly twenty years.

Great post Zee

[CaudleHalbard]

If they actually installed the cameras because money was going missing every night that is pretty serious; it is not one one-off. Linda is, one assumes, in complete denial because of the seriousness of the theft.

[sampvt]

Some people are just vindictive and live in a world of lies and deceit. Linda is doing herself no favours by acting this way, she is never going to recouperate from this. She will be back to counting coupons and cashing dhs cheques again before long.

She has lost her family and friends and soon her dignity if she isn't careful.

[jet]

That's because he's an aggressive bully...

He obviously is a violent man whose only way to deal with anger is to use his fists.
The other night in the garden he told Lee "Get it out!" "Punch somebody, punch me"!
Men like that never change, because the reason they react with violent words or actions is because they haven't the intelligence or capacity to deal with a situation in a mature way. They can only let their fists speak for them.

[Seraphim]

He obviously is a violent man whose only way to deal with anger is to use his fists.
The other night in the garden he told Lee "Get it out!" "Punch somebody, punch me"!
Men like that never change, because the reason they react with violent words or actions is because they haven't the intelligence or capacity to deal with a situation in a mature way. They can only let their fists speak for them.

It's not obvious to me. He's kept a lid on his anger on BB, and is well able to handle aggro from other people in a variety of ways: ignoring it; walking away; firing a snappy retort, etc. The papers aren't full of his victims coming forward and telling tales, now he's on BB. There's a news story from a marriage which ended 25 years ago and nothing since: no assault charges; no wife beating allegations; no court cases; no candid camera shots of him caught red-handed with his fist raised.

As far as I can see, there are two possibilities:

1. He's grown up/changed/got a handle on his drinking and emotions.
2. I've missed something in the papers.

[Lister of Smeg]

Tbh id want to do the same ifvsomeone stole from one of my friends.

[Crimson Dynamo]

He died of liver failure

Is that a polite way of saying he was a chronic alcoholic?

[jet]

It's not obvious to me. He's kept a lid on his anger on BB, and is well able to handle aggro from other people in a variety of ways: ignoring it; walking away; firing a snappy retort, etc. The papers aren't full of his victims coming forward and telling tales, now he's on BB. There's a news story from a marriage which ended 25 years ago and nothing since: no assault charges; no wife beating allegations; no court cases; no candid camera shots of him caught red-handed with his fist raised.

As far as I can see, there are two possibilities:

1. He's grown up/changed/got a handle on his drinking and emotions.
2. I've missed something in the papers.

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

[sampvt]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

God I love reading your posts, they are better than Jims jokes. You must let me know what book of logic you read from, lol

[the truth]

he is 100% right. his name was dragged into it and he was innocent. its linda who is endlessly bringing up the past. such a sad bitter hypcrite

[jet]

God I love reading your posts, they are better than Jims jokes. You must let me know what book of logic you read from, lol

Thanks. I aim to please. :xyxwave:
By the way, common sense and experience don't come from books alone. :nono:

Methinks I have you rattled. lol

[the truth]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

it is right to walk away in this case, because these people are plain jealous of him and have bulllied him from day 1....they dont care what he has to say, they are out to get him. especially as hes the most talented and most famous person left. they want to detsroy him simple as that. so thats the point in engaging with such people? none at all....even when he cooks meals and cleans the kitchen they attack him. theyre man haters, worse than that theyre also bitter and jelaous too

[the truth]

It's not obvious to me. He's kept a lid on his anger on BB, and is well able to handle aggro from other people in a variety of ways: ignoring it; walking away; firing a snappy retort, etc. The papers aren't full of his victims coming forward and telling tales, now he's on BB. There's a news story from a marriage which ended 25 years ago and nothing since: no assault charges; no wife beating allegations; no court cases; no candid camera shots of him caught red-handed with his fist raised.

As far as I can see, there are two possibilities:

1. He's grown up/changed/got a handle on his drinking and emotions.
2. I've missed something in the papers.

yes agreed plus most the the flak thrown at him was utter lies and was thrown out of court

[jet]

it is right to walk away in this case, because these people are plain jealous of him and have bulllied him from day 1....they dont care what he has to say, they are out to get him. especially as hes the most talented and most famous person left. they want to detsroy him simple as that. so thats the point in engaging with such people? none at all....even when he cooks meals and cleans the kitchen they attack him. theyre man haters, worse than that theyre also bitter and jelaous too

I was referring to the Jim/Linda situation and how the tension between them could have been resolved early on in the show.

[the truth]

I was referring to the Jim/Linda situation and how the tension between them could have been resolved early on in the show.

impossible. she is a vile bitter jealous boring bile filled woman. she also displays no humour, social intelligence, self awareness etc I doubt any person on earth could really get along with such a person, nor would they want to

[sampvt]

Thanks. I aim to please. :xyxwave:
By the way, common sense and experience don't come from books alone. :nono:

Methinks I have you rattled. lol

Me rattled, never, I am 62 son. Ive had more experiences on the kazzi than you have had in your whole life. I am so cool calm and collected. :xyxwave:

[Seraphim]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

Who says? I recently read an anger management book written by a prominent psychologist which advocated these very techniques for dealing with anger. It said that research has shown that bottling up rage does not lead to an explosion and that in fact the best way to handle it is to allow it to dissipate naturally.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He is not a violent man just because you think he is. He was violent according to one of his ex-wives 25 years ago. Since then, there has been no incidence of violence come to light. As far as the incident described in this thread...

‘Jim blew his top when Linda’s husband was caught. He was playing up the road and he came down and went ballistic. He got right up to him and wanted to beat him up. He was yelling, “No one steals from my mates”. Linda and others got the two apart"

If Jim had gone right up to someone then he had the opportunity to sock him one. This description doesn't say he socked him. It doesn't even say that Jim made any physical threats. We don't know why the person who reported the incident said that Jim wanted to beat him up. That might have been an exaggeration, or a mistaken idea formed by an onlooker. It might have been the truth, but you don't know and neither do I because we weren't there. Again, this incident happened about 20 years ago.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

He has tried this sort of thing. We have seen it on the program. Linda does not want to engage with him, or let it go, or discuss it for obvious reasons (i.e. exposing her husband's misdeed). Jim obviously suspected that this incident was at the root of the problem, but out of deference to both her feelings and respect for the dead he chose not to push it or discuss it with any other housemate or in the diary room.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

No it is not what happened. Jim didn't lose his cool. He said to Luisa, in response to her asking what the issue was, that she needed to ask Linda.. to ask her about Frank Carson's dressing room. That's just a fact, and he obviously would not have anticipated that Linda would make such an issue of it. Any reasonable person would have simply explained to Luisa what had happened, or said she didn't want to discuss it. Instead she deliberately made it into an enormous drama by faking an over-emotional melt-down in order to get everyone on her side yet again. As far as Jim being passive aggressive in response to her overt hatred, manipulative behaviour and nastiness: give me Jim every time. I cannot wait to see the back of that Linda Nolan.

[the truth]

we can see thankfully how dishponest bullying and unpleasant linda is , thanks to big brother. she is a total psychological bully. this show unlike many others really exposes how some people behave 24 hours a day. bravo to big brother for at leats exposing this

[anne666]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

Excellent post

[anne666]

we can see thankfully how dishponest bullying and unpleasant linda is , thanks to big brother. she is a total psychological bully. this show unlike many others really exposes how some people behave 24 hours a day. bravo to big brother for at leats exposing this

Are you privy to some secret 24 hour a day live feed? We see a few edited minutes out of every 24 hours. :conf:

[the truth]

Excellent post

no it wasnt, it was utter nonsense

[sampvt]

Who says? I recently read an anger management book written by a prominent psychologist which advocated these very techniques for dealing with anger. It said that research has shown that bottling up rage does not lead to an explosion and that in fact the best way to handle it is to allow it to dissipate naturally.



He is not a violent man just because you think he is. He was violent according to one of his ex-wives 25 years ago. Since then, there has been no incidence of violence come to light. As far as the incident described in this thread...

‘Jim blew his top when Linda’s husband was caught. He was playing up the road and he came down and went ballistic. He got right up to him and wanted to beat him up. He was yelling, “No one steals from my mates”. Linda and others got the two apart"

If Jim had gone right up to someone then he had the opportunity to sock him one. This description doesn't say he socked him. It doesn't even say that Jim made any physical threats. We don't know why the person who reported the incident said that Jim wanted to beat him up. That might have been an exaggeration, or a mistaken idea formed by an onlooker. It might have been the truth, but you don't know and neither do I because we weren't there. Again, this incident happened about 20 years ago.



He has tried this sort of thing. We have seen it on the program. Linda does not want to engage with him, or let it go, or discuss it for obvious reasons (i.e. exposing her husband's misdeed). Jim obviously suspected that this incident was at the root of the problem, but out of deference to both her feelings and respect for the dead he chose not to push it or discuss it with any other housemate or in the diary room.



No it is not what happened. Jim didn't lose his cool. He said to Luisa, in response to her asking what the issue was, that she needed to ask Linda.. to ask her about Frank Carson's dressing room. That's just a fact, and he obviously would not have anticipated that Linda would make such an issue of it. Any reasonable person would have simply explained to Luisa what had happened, or said she didn't want to discuss it. Instead she deliberately made it into an enormous drama by faking an over-emotional melt-down in order to get everyone on her side yet again. As far as Jim being passive aggressive in response to her overt hatred, manipulative behaviour and nastiness. Give me Jim every time. I cannot wait to see the back of that Linda Nolan.

Now that's what I call a good arse smacking post, great read.

[sampvt]

Excellent post

Cant agree anne, it was totally biased and complete rubbish actually.

[joeysteele]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.

A violent man who has beaten his wife, threatened to beat up someone inappropriately (as in the case of Linda's husband - what happened to the law dealing with theft?) and still uses violent words as a way to deal with situations can curb his instincts to use his fists and if so that is a good thing - but can that instinct really ever 'go away'? No - because Jim now uses passive - aggressiveness to deal with situations and that is a classic switch -over coping mechanism.

He could have taken Linda aside and asked for a quiet word. He could have asked her what the problem was in a non - angry, quiet way and listened to her answer without interrupting. She would have got it off her chest and he would feel good for doing the right thing.Then they could perhaps have been able to move on.

Walking away, ignoring her, sniping back at her and interrupting her (all classic passive - aggressive behaviour) only made the frustration in Linda worse and the vicious circle continued. There is only one way then it could have come to a head - Jim losing his cool and slipping up and that is indeed what happened.

Hi my friend jet, I don't say a great deal to you as to Jim as I know we are on totally opposite sides as to him in this CBB series.
My great respect for you yourself however remains 100% intact.

What I want to say here however is, I actually applaud Jim's walking away from full confrontation, it is something Lee does too I have noticed.
Speaking for myself, many times I have found myself in a situation where harsh words and a major argument could have likely blown up.

I choose in the main,to walk away and far from finding it bottling up, I find if I go out for a walk or take my Dog for a walk, after a short time things can seem very different.
On loads of occasions where I could have fallen out badly with someone,I have walked away, thought hard then came back,smiled and all is well.

After that,I find anyway, the original problem,or a great deal of it, starts to pale into insignificance.
So I do really applaud Jim for taking that action really,that's all I want to say.

[Seraphim]

I'd just like to add this. If Jim was in any way as bad as Linda would like us to think, then why did she agree to be in the house with him? I witnessed a friend of mine being bullied by a boyfriend and I never spoke to him again, apart from telling him to give her the flowers he brought to me when he appeared on my doorstep the next day. I wouldn't let him in, and refused to speak to him again. If I'd agreed to be on a show then discovered he would be on it too, I'd have refused to go on, and given my explanation why. She took the job, and has spent the entire time bitching, carping, attacking and manipulating, and generally trying to make his life miserable. She has sucked the entire house into the drama and spoiled the atmosphere for everyone, including the viewers.

[Kazanne]

Hi my friend jet, I don't say a great deal to you as to Jim as I know we are on totally opposite sides as to him in this CBB series.
My great respect for you yourself however remains 100% intact.

What I want to say here however is, I actually applaud Jim's walking away from full confrontation, it is something Lee does too I have noticed.
Speaking for myself, many times I have found myself in a situation where harsh words and a major argument could have likely blown up.

I choose in the main,to walk away and far from finding it bottling up, I find if I go out for a walk or take my Dog for a walk, after a short time things can seem very different.
On loads of occasions where I could have fallen out badly with someone,I have walked away, thought hard then came back,smiled and all is well.

After that,I find anyway, the original problem,or a great deal of it, starts to pale into insignificance.
So I do really applaud Jim for taking that action really,that's all I want to say.

:thumbs:some light relief Joey,:joker::joker:
ADAdMiZK0Vw

[anne666]

Deleted

[jet]

Hi my friend jet, I don't say a great deal to you as to Jim as I know we are on totally opposite sides as to him in this CBB series.
My great respect for you yourself however remains 100% intact.

What I want to say here however is, I actually applaud Jim's walking away from full confrontation, it is something Lee does too I have noticed.
Speaking for myself, many times I have found myself in a situation where harsh words and a major argument could have likely blown up.

I choose in the main,to walk away and far from finding it bottling up, I find if I go out for a walk or take my Dog for a walk, after a short time things can seem very different.
On loads of occasions where I could have fallen out badly with someone,I have walked away, thought hard then came back,smiled and all is well.

After that,I find anyway, the original problem,or a great deal of it, starts to pale into insignificance.
So I do really applaud Jim for taking that action really,that's all I want to say.

Hi Joey! :wavey:
I agree with you that on many occasions just getting away for a walk puts a different perspective on things - but not if someone is holding long term anger and the person who they are angry with just keeps ignoring it, walking away, sniping back etc. - and CERTAINLY not if you are stuck in a house with them for weeks with nowhere else to go.

[Kazanne]

Hi Joey! :wavey:
I agree with you that on many occasions just getting away for a walk puts a different perspective on things - but not if someone is holding long term anger and the person who they are angry with just keeps ignoring it, walking away, sniping back etc. - and CERTAINLY not if you are stuck in a house with them for weeks with nowhere else to go.

Jet,you sound as though you are WILLING Jim to lose his temper,Why??? It takes a bigger man to walk away :hugesmile:

[the truth]

Jet,you sound as though you are WILLING Jim to lose his temper,Why??? It takes a bigger man to walk away :hugesmile:

I agree. though he is within his right to complain to big brother about being bullied. he should have done this just as michael madsen should have after he was harassed and bullied and sexually discriminated against by denise welch a few years ago.. men you need to start complaining

[joeysteele]

Hi Joey! :wavey:
I agree with you that on many occasions just getting away for a walk puts a different perspective on things - but not if someone is holding long term anger and the person who they are angry with just keeps ignoring it, walking away, sniping back etc. - and CERTAINLY not if you are stuck in a house with them for weeks with nowhere else to go.

That is very true too,I agree, being stuck in the house is a problem in itself.

I cannot see these 2 ever sorting out the issue.
However and to be fair to him Jim has asked several times to talk to Linda alone and for her to really lay on the table why she hates him but she has refused every single time of him asking.

In that scenario, for me, him walking away and saying as little as possible is the best and likely only course of action.

[the truth]

That is very true too,I agree, being stuck in the house is a problem in itself.

I cannot see these 2 ever sorting out the issue.
However and to be fair to him Jim has asked several times to talk to Linda alone and for her to really lay on the table why she hates him but she has refused every single time of him asking.

In that scenario, for me, him walking away and saying as little as possible is the best and likely only course of action.

agreed. she has always been the instigator, he has always been the peacemaker.

[jet]

Me rattled, never, I am 62 son. Ive had more experiences on the kazzi than you have had in your whole life. I am so cool calm and collected. :xyxwave:

And I'm not a lot younger, with a lifetime of experience in my profession. I don't see you as all that calm and collected, sorry. :joker:

[jet]

That is very true too,I agree, being stuck in the house is a problem in itself.

I cannot see these 2 ever sorting out the issue.
However and to be fair to him Jim has asked several times to talk to Linda alone and for her to really lay on the table why she hates him but she has refused every single time of him asking.

In that scenario, for me, him walking away and saying as little as possible is the best and likely only course of action.

I have never seen him asking her quietly when they were alone and not having a spat, but it's possible I missed it. If that happened then could you tell me the details?

[jet]

[QUOTE=Seraphim;6632016]Who says? I recently read an anger management book written by a prominent psychologist which advocated these very techniques for dealing with anger. It said that research has shown that bottling up rage does not lead to an explosion and that in fact the best way to handle it is to allow it to dissipate naturally.


Newly fangled nonsense. :nono:

[the truth]

[QUOTE=Seraphim;6632016]Who says? I recently read an anger management book written by a prominent psychologist which advocated these very techniques for dealing with anger. It said that research has shown that bottling up rage does not lead to an explosion and that in fact the best way to handle it is to allow it to dissipate naturally.


Newly fangled nonsense. :nono:

agreed , its utter tripe. if everyone argued about every tiny little thing the nationa and world would be in 1000 times bigger mess than its already in. a bigger person has to often rise about petty difference. if only bitter twats like linda could

[jet]

impossible. she is a vile bitter jealous boring bile filled woman. she also displays no humour, social intelligence, self awareness etc I doubt any person on earth could really get along with such a person, nor would they want to

You sound very angry. Go for a walk. :joker::joker:

[the truth]

You sound very angry. Go for a walk. :joker::joker:

thanks for caring

[Seraphim]

[QUOTE=jet;6632178]

agreed , its utter tripe. if everyone argued about every tiny little thing the nationa and world would be in 1000 times bigger mess than its already in. a bigger person has to often rise about petty difference. if only bitter twats like linda could

You are being contradictory if you are agreeing with Jet. The book to which I was referring advocated a variety of techniques to deal with anger, but having an argument was not one of them.

[jet]

[QUOTE=the truth;6632184]

You are being contradictory if you are agreeing with Jet. The book to which I was referring advocated a variety of techniques to deal with anger, but having an argument was not one of them.

Where did I say having an argument was? Quote, please?

[Seraphim]

[QUOTE=Seraphim;6632016]Who says? I recently read an anger management book written by a prominent psychologist which advocated these very techniques for dealing with anger. It said that research has shown that bottling up rage does not lead to an explosion and that in fact the best way to handle it is to allow it to dissipate naturally.


Newly fangled nonsense. :nono:

:laugh:

It made sense to me. I don't have big anger issues, but inevitably I have had to deal with people who have. I've found that trying to resolve matters just makes them worse. It's definitely better to simply remove oneself from a situation and give them time to cool off.

[Seraphim]

I agree. though he is within his right to complain to big brother about being bullied. he should have done this just as michael madsen should have after he was harassed and bullied and sexually discriminated against by denise welch a few years ago.. men you need to start complaining

I wonder what the legal position would be in this type of situation.

Linda is being paid for her appearance, but is that the same thing as being an employee? If she has a legal employee status, then under normal employment laws, Jim would probably have a legitimate grievance with regard to the way he is being treated. Presumably there is a contract which the participants must sign with regard to accepting whatever is dished out on them. How far could/should that be stretched before it becomes unacceptable?

[Munchkins]

Yes Jim makes mistakes, but why do people act as though Linda is innocent? she has instigated the whole negative environment in the bloody house, Jim was quite happy to go in there even with their past, and start a fresh hence him being nice whilst they were being handcuffed together, but no Linda had to keep it with her, spreading rumours about him to the others, and how nasty he is, constantly sniping at him
I am never going to defend what Jim did the other did he went too far and it was awful, but its hardly surprising he finally snapped, and now Linda gets what she wants, looking like the true victim, even if Jim has the public support
If its true Jim was going to beat her husband up thats shocking, and even more testament to how hes done well in controlling his temper

[CaudleHalbard]

They are most certainly not employees! :D

[Vanessa]

I wonder what the legal position would be this type of situation.

Linda is being paid for her appearance, but is that the same thing as being an employee? If she has a legal employee status, then under normal employment laws, Jim would probably have a legitimate grievance with regard to the way he is being treated. Presumably there is a contract which the participants must sign with regard to accepting whatever is dished out on them. How far could/should that be stretched before it becomes unacceptable?

It's definetely bullying. Linda and Louisa are relentless. They constantly ridicule him and isolate him. :mad:

[CaudleHalbard]

Just on a factual point, has Jim ever been convicted of a crime of violence?

If not we should really use the term "allegedly" when taking about this.

[Vanessa]

Just on a factual point, has Jim ever been convicted of a crime of violence?

If not we should really use the term "allegedly" when taking about this.

No, he hasn't.

[Seraphim]

They are most certainly not employees! :D

Is there a legal precedence for this yet? If not, then nothing is certain. In France, the legality is that people in reality TV shows are employees and entitled to employment rights. French reality TV show contestants therefore have to be given a number of hours when there are no cameras operating, and they are covered by the same laws as all other employees. It doesn't sound to me as the UK has any legal stance for now:

http://www.cipd.co.uk/pm/peoplemanagement/b/weblog/archive/2013/01/29/the-apprentice-week-12-reality-tv-show-contestants-could-be-entitled-to-employment-rights-2009-06.aspx

[Munchkins]

No, he hasn't.

Even more disgusting that people try to bring up the sex allegations Jim was accused of

[MTVN]

Just on a factual point, has Jim ever been convicted of a crime of violence?

If not we should really use the term "allegedly" when taking about this.

No he hasn't, most of it comes from his autobiography where he made references to how him and his wife were both violent towards each other and from a tabloid story from his former wife where she made some more serious allegations but it never went further than that

[Vanessa]

Even more disgusting that people try to bring up the sex allegations Jim was accused of

I agree. Some people talk about him like he's a criminal. :mad: We all have a past and we all make mistakes. Some bigger than others.

[sampvt]

The problem here is that men are expected to suck it up and women are protected with kid gloves, especially on this program. Ask yourself this, if Jim was to act like Luisa when he was drunk and performed sex acts like she has, what would happen......exactly.....he would be toast so why or how can she get away with it. Similarly if Jim had have hounded Linda like she has him, he would be arrested as a sex pest or stalker.

Please don't tell me men and women are equal on this show, its simply not true.

[MrWong]

Just on a factual point, has Jim ever been convicted of a crime of violence?

If not we should really use the term "allegedly" when taking about this.

No but he has admitted to violently attacking his ex wife in his autobiography.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Even more disgusting that people try to bring up the sex allegations Jim was accused of

Jim brought up someone else's past so his past is COMPLETELY fair game

[jet]

[QUOTE=jet;6632178]

:laugh:

It made sense to me. I don't have a big anger issues, but inevitably I have had to deal with people who have. I've found that trying to resolve matters just makes them worse. It's definitely better to simply remove oneself from a situation and give the anger time to dissipate.

I too deal with people with anger issues and I don't agree. If a person CAN remove themselves permanently then it makes sense, but how often do people have that luxury?

[sampvt]

No but he has admitted to violently attacking his ex wife in his autobiography.

Wise up, it sells books, that's all.

[Vanessa]

The problem here is that men are expected to suck it up and women are protected with kid gloves, especially on this program. Ask yourself this, if Jim was to act like Luisa when he was drunk and performed sex acts like she has, what would happen......exactly.....he would be toast so why or how can she get away with it. Similarly if Jim had have hounded Linda like she has him, he would be arrested as a sex pest or stalker.

Please don't tell me men and women are equal on this show, its simply not true.

I agree. You're right. Just like what happened with Denise and Michael.

[jet]

Wise up, it sells books, that's all.

And you said I talk rubbish. :hugesmile:

[Munchkins]

Wise up, it sells books, that's all.

I support Jim but that is BS, why would he potentially tarnish his views to thousands by admitting to it, it could potentially ruin him in the eyes of many it wouldnt be worth it for the money earned

[MrWong]

And you said I talk rubbish. :hugesmile:

I support Jim but that is BS, why would he potentially tarnish his views to thousands by admitting to it, it could potentially ruin him in the eyes of many it wouldnt be worth it for the money earned

Sampvt would make a ****ing lousy publicist.

[sampvt]

Sampvt would make a ****ing lousy publicist.

Never needed to worry about that. As long as I can drive and putt, I will get by.

[Seraphim]

No but he has admitted to violently attacking his ex wife in his autobiography.

Yeah, yeah.. so you keep saying. It's hardly relevant to this issue. Linda knew him, has seen him at his worst, and has no doubt heard every story about him. If she believed he was a violent bullying sex pervert, she wouldn't have agreed to enter the house with him and wouldn't have agreed to share a bed while handcuffed to him.

[MTVN]

Never needed to worry about that. As long as I can drive and putt, I will get by.

But can you chip :think:

[Kazanne]

No he hasn't, most of it comes from his autobiography where he made references to how him and his wife were both violent towards each other and from a tabloid story from his former wife where she made some more serious allegations but it never went further than that

Great point MTVN IF Jim hadn't have brought this up himself no one would have been any the wiser and whos to say the wife didn't exaggerate things,she wouldn't be the first,if not her the paper certainly would add bits here and there.

[jet]

Yes Jim makes mistakes, but why do people act as though Linda is innocent? she has instigated the whole negative environment in the bloody house, Jim was quite happy to go in there even with their past, and start a fresh hence him being nice whilst they were being handcuffed together, but no Linda had to keep it with her, spreading rumours about him to the others, and how nasty he is, constantly sniping at him
I am never going to defend what Jim did the other did he went too far and it was awful, but its hardly surprising he finally snapped, and now Linda gets what she wants, looking like the true victim, even if Jim has the public support
If its true Jim was going to beat her husband up thats shocking, and even more testament to how hes done well in controlling his temper

More people are on Jim's side on this forum than not, and the voting public are keeping him in the house. On the contrary, Linda has been blasted and called the most awful names. I'm not a fan of hers at all, but I don't like the vitriol spewed against a woman with no known awful character flaws in her past just because she dislikes Jim Davidson with a horrendous past reputation and she shows it.
Yes, she made her distaste obvious when she heard he was in the house. But people are forgetting that when she was handcuffed to him, she spoke in the diary room of how nice he was to her and how he was looking after her. That doesn't sound like a women to me who was intent on carrying out a vendetta against him.
Not long after that, the HM's were talking on the HL's show of how Jim kept butting in when Linda was chatting to the group and cutting her off in mid sentence as if she wasn't there. This was again mentioned some time later.

So none of us know if it was that or if something else happened to rile Linda up again. :shrug:

[Seraphim]

[QUOTE=Seraphim;6632298]

I too deal with people with anger issues and I don't agree. If a person CAN remove themselves permanently then it makes sense, but how often do people have that luxury?

They don't need to remove themselves permanently. Everyone is different - some people just need a short time to get over anger, while others need longer, like a day or two. Linda Nolan obviously needs a lifetime, since she's still furious over an incident which took place twenty years ago.

[Vanessa]

[QUOTE=jet;6632358]

They don't need to remove themselves permanently. Everyone is different - some people just need a short time to get over anger, while others need longer, like a day or two. Linda Nolan obviously needs a lifetime, since she's still furious over an incident which took place twenty years ago.

:laugh2:

[Ithinkiloveyoutoo]

seeeeen.

[Kazanne]

[QUOTE=Seraphim;6632439]

:laugh2:

ADAdMiZK0Vw:joker::joker::joker:

[MrWong]

Yeah, yeah.. so you keep saying. It's hardly relevant to this issue. Linda knew him, has seen him at his worst, and has no doubt heard every story about him. If she believed he was a violent bullying sex pervert, she wouldn't have agreed to enter the house with him and wouldn't have agreed to share a bed while handcuffed to him.

What are you on about?

A poster asked if Jim had been convicted of a violent offence and i replied that he hadn't, he'd admitted to violence in his book.

[flamingGalah!]

No but he has admitted to violently attacking his ex wife in his autobiography.

And his ex wife violently attacked him too... Jim was never charged of anything either, his wife didn't even press charges...

[Seraphim]

More people are on Jim's side on this forum than not, and the voting public are keeping him in the house. On the contrary, Linda has been blasted and called the most awful names. I'm not a fan of hers at all, but I don't like the vitriol spewed against a woman with no known awful character flaws in her past just because she dislikes Jim Davidson with a horrendous past reputation and she shows it.
Yes, she made her distaste obvious when she heard he was in the house. But people are forgetting than when she was handcuffed to him, she spoke in the diary room of how nice he was to her and how he was looking after her. That doesn't sound like a women to me who was intent on carrying out a vendetta against him.
Not long after that, the HM's were talking on the HL's show of how Jim kept butting in when Linda was chatting to the group and cutting her off in mid sentence as if she wasn't there. This was again mentioned some time later.

So none of us know if it was that or if something else happened to rile Linda up again. :shrug:

True, but if Linda had a problem with him cutting her off all the time, then she is sufficiently assertive to turn around and call him out for it. "Jim - please let me finish my sentence." She is also capable of stating what the problem is when he asked her during her more unpleasant rants. Rather than blast off a stream of abusive spite, she could have given the details. "Earlier today, you kept interrupting me whenever I opened my mouth. I feel as if you're trying to cut me out of the conversation, and don't respect my opinions." or something similar. That he could understand and deal with.

[jet]

And his ex wife violently attacked him too... Jim was never charged of anything either, his wife didn't even press charges...

Battered wives rarely do...

[sampvt]

But can you chip :think:

You drive for show and putt for dough. Being able to chip is for those that cant hit the greens in regulation. lol. In answer though, my chipping is pretty much up there. I had a 45% greenside saves and 75% sand saves in my hayday so I get by. The only chipping I do these days is with potatoes but I might start again next year when the sun shines again.

[flamingGalah!]

Battered wives rarely do...

But many do & if it was public knowledge why didn't she?? None of us know what happened behind closed doors, only Jim & his ex can comment on that :xyxwave:

[sampvt]

Battered wives rarely do...

Tosh. That's a horrible thing to say in this day and age. There are thousands of wives taking their hubbies to court and taking all their money. Its the national sport these days.

My best mate was married for 24 years and when we were on tour, she had an affair and even lent the guy money, their money. When he got back home she was discovered and reported. He questioned her and she flew at him taunting him with really horrible jibes and slapped him. He restrained her and threw her onto the sofa. You guest it, he was arrested, done for abuse and she took the house and bankrupted him.

The only good thing was that 12 months later, her new BF had spent all her money and threw her out. She is on the phone to my mate every day now asking to come back. When he tells her to bugger off, she cries rape and gets him done. Defo a mans world aint it.

[MTVN]

You drive for show and putt for dough. Being able to chip is for those that cant hit the greens in regulation. lol. In answer though, my chipping is pretty much up there. I had a 45% greenside saves and 75% sand saves in my hayday so I get by. The only chipping I do these days is with potatoes but I might start again next year when the sun shines again.

Chipping is the strongest part of my game, it is putting that lets me down most the time, too many two putts on those tricky little five footers :rant: though I am only a very fair weather golfer

[MrWong]

And his ex wife violently attacked him too... Jim was never charged of anything either, his wife didn't even press charges...

Thousands of women across the country never end up pressing charges, for various reasons, though i'm sure you know that already.

[flamingGalah!]

Thousands of women across the country never end up pressing charges, for various reasons, though i'm sure you know that already.

But most of those are not married to someone famous & if Jim has actually admitted to hitting her (as well as her hitting him) why did she not press charges??

[sampvt]

Chipping is the strongest part of my game, it is putting that lets me down most the time, too many two putts on those tricky little five footers :rant: though I am only a very fair weather golfer

I will give you a tip and it works. Next time you go to putt, breath all the way out, loosen your grip and putt for a hole 12 inches past the one you are going for on the same break line, ie hit it harder.

You never hit a putt you stroke it. That's why its called a stroke 4 or stroke 4 index.

Another thing that amateurs do wrong is they take the head back too far. 5 footers are easy if you take the head back no further than 6 inches and play through the ball.

Also to help you not have to chip so often, if you cant make the shot 8 times out of 10 in your head, don't go for it, take a club less, choke down and relax through the impact zone.

[MrWong]

But most of those are not married to someone famous & if Jim has actually admitted to hitting her (as well as her hitting him) why did she not press charges??

You'll have to ask her.

Fact is, a significant amount go unreported.

http://www.standingtogether.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/standingUpload/PR/YouGov_survey.pdf

[Seraphim]

What are you on about?

A poster asked if Jim had been convicted of a violent offence and i replied that he hadn't, he'd admitted to violence in his book.

Sorry Mr. Wong.. only the first part was in response to your comments about wife-beating. The rest was just a general comment on the various issues which have been raised in this thread by other posters. I should have put it into a new paragraph and made my meaning more clear.

[sampvt]

You'll have to ask her.

Fact is, a significant amount go unreported.

http://www.standingtogether.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/standingUpload/PR/YouGov_survey.pdf

Are we talking about the same woman that got her brother to put a contract out on Jim after she didn't get enough money out of him and admitted herself to punching Jim when he made her mad.

[flamingGalah!]

You'll have to ask her.

Fact is, a significant amount go unreported.

http://www.standingtogether.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/standingUpload/PR/YouGov_survey.pdf

Exactly, you cannot judge & neither can I :xyxwave:

[MTVN]

I will give you a tip and it works. Next time you go to putt, breath all the way out, loosen your grip and putt for a hole 12 inches past the one you are going for on the same break line, ie hit it harder.

You never hit a putt you stroke it. That's why its called a stroke 4 or stroke 4 index.

Another thing that amateurs do wrong is they take the head back too far. 5 footers are easy if you take the head back no further than 6 inches and play through the ball.

Also to help you not have to chip so often, if you cant make the shot 8 times out of 10 in your head, don't go for it, take a club less, choke down and relax through the impact zone.

Hmm interesting, thanks, will bear it in mind on my next round (which'll probably be in about 4 months)

[Videostar]

So now being a thief is more noble than defending a friend who has had money taken from him. :joker:

No one here is saying Jim is perfect and maybe the Linda fans on here would have dealt with the thieving git in a different way (sit him down and educate the thief that stealing is wrong then give him a hug and a warm bowl of soup) but he was sticking up for a close friend who was wronged.

Linda constantly attacks Jim in the house and yet it's Jim who is in the wrong:conf:, Jim dares to talk back at Luisa when she was in one of her self righteous rants and insults to older HM's and it's Jim in the wrong :conf:, Jim defends an old friend who had cash stolen from him (not to meantion charity money stolen) and somehow it's Jim in the wrong. :conf:

Linda/Luisa fans on here have a strange sense of right and wrong I must say. :shocked:

[MrWong]

Are we talking about the same woman that got her brother to put a contract out on Jim after she didn't get enough money out of him and admitted herself to punching Jim when he made her mad.

Not quite son..

The TV boss who married Jim Davidson’s ex-wife Alison Holloway has sensationally admitted taking out a contract on the top comic’s life. Burt Kearns met hitmen after being enraged by Davidson’s account of his 18-month marriage to the sexy newsgirl. The American executive claimed the 45-year-old Generation Game host had tried to make excuses for beating up Alison by claiming she was equally to blame. Kearns stormed: “I hired some guys to break his ****ing knees.” He added: “I was going to kill him.”

Naughty naughty. That's how rumours start :nono:

Where did you get that it was Alison that took out the contract?

[optimisticcynic]

Walking away and ignoring anger is not the best way to deal with it as the anger becomes bottled up. Sooner or later the person will explode, do something inappropriate or once again turn to drink or drugs to cope with destructive emotions.


Twaddle. Waling away is a crucial step in anger management and the thing people with anger management difficulties struggle with the most. Having an alternative outlet for your emotion is also crucial, and Jim seems able to offfload his frustration amongst his peers, which is healthy. Humour is also a mature defence mechanism and he uses this a great deal. If he stood around screaming you'd have said he should have walked away, when he walks away you state walking away is wrong. Gott in Himmel!

[sampvt]

Not quite son..



Naughty naughty. That's how rumours start :nono:

Where did you get that it was Alison that took out the contract?

First of all stop baiting me by calling me son, I am twice your age. Secondly I worded it wrong, it was her that chose her brother or whatever, she was in the middle of it.

The end result is the same so stop deflecting and trying to patronise everyone that posts against you. Please do me a favour and refrain from insulting me, you have enough of my scalps on your belt.

[CaudleHalbard]

Is there a legal precedence for this yet? If not, then nothing is certain. In France, the legality is that people in reality TV shows are employees

This isn't France. I have some experience with this area of the law and I am 99% certain that CBB contracts would be contacts for services rather than contracts of service.

If they are employees, BB would normally have to deduct income tax and national insurance contributions from whatever is paid to contestants. I think we can be reasonably confident that they don't! ;)

[MrWong]

First of all stop baiting me by calling me son, I am twice your age. Secondly I worded it wrong, it was her that chose her brother or whatever, she was in the middle of it.

The end result is the same so stop deflecting and trying to patronise everyone that posts against you. Please do me a favour and refrain from insulting me, you have enough of my scalps on your belt.

So nothing about Alison taking out the contact then. Thought as much.

[sampvt]

So nothing about Alison taking out the contact then. Thought as much.

Night night folks, the forum is loosing its fun with baiters like this constasntly sitting there pissing everyone off. I cant afford anymore infractions, maybe see you all next week.

[Seraphim]

This isn't France. I have some experience with this area of the law and I am 99% certain that CBB contracts would be contacts for services rather than contracts of service.

If they are employees, BB would normally have to deduct income tax and national insurance contributions from whatever is paid to contestants. I think we can be reasonably confident that they don't! ;)

I understand how our tax & nat. ins / tax/self-esystem works. I was, however, wondering if the working conditions of reality TV participants has been established in court, via a legal precedent. I gave the example of France as a country in which this has now happened. They have a similar system to ours, but the legal precedent has been established that reality TV participants' conditions of work should be the same as any employee.

[joeysteele]

I have never seen him asking her quietly when they were alone and not having a spat, but it's possible I missed it. If that happened then could you tell me the details?

He has never asked when they were alone not having a spat.
They seem to be rarely ever alone but he has asked at least 3 times where I have seen.
He asked if they could talk and she refused quite early wehshe indicated they didn't get on, again on the night in question when it was kicking off he asked if she would talk to him.

Then on the morning he apologised, he said when she was ready,then apologised but she never went to talk to him on their own.He ended that moment with the statement that he wished he knew why she hated him so much.

She has never said she was willing to talk to him on any issue related to their apparant dislike of each other.He has made approaches and been knocked back everytime.
She will only engage in conversation when she is surrounded with the other women which with them butting in would make it even more unlikely that they would ever reach any compromise or understanding.

After all these issues have bene there from the start and maybe when they were handcuffed was the time they may have got somewhere but during all that time,she was never expressing this hatred she has for him then.
In fact in the diary room chat she had only the other night she admitted that when they were cuffed together, he was really good with her and looked after her.

I think now it is way too late to sort anything out, she has said far too much against him to the others now and really all he has said is that he doesn;t know why she really hates him as much as she proclaims to.
As I say, he has indicated and asked at elast 3 times to talk to her about things alone, she has rejected every one of such approaches.

Even on the spaceship task, after she had got huffy over some cushions and had him pulled up by the others along with herself for upsetting her.
Jim asked to talk to her then, she never did.
In the spaceship, he then asked Luisa if she could possibly find out what he was supposed to have done to upset her after he clearly felt then Linda would not have it out alone,preferring to have her audience' so to speak.

Why he even bothers is beyond me but equally so, why when he is talking to others I cannot get why she jumps in on anything he says.
Such as his question to Luisa the other night that started this off.
Linda waded in getting at him for asking such a question, it was not a nasty question, it was a pesonal one.
However if anyone should have expresed offence at it, it was Luisa who was the one asked the question by him but until Linda waded in, Luisa was quite happy engaging in answering it and discussing her time with her child with Jim too.

She will never talk to him alone I doubt, I myself,rightly or wrongly,believe she has an agenda to really make him blow hits top and look extremely bad in the house.
My hope is he does what he has done these last 2 weeks and not give her that satisfaction.

[Seraphim]

Twaddle. Walking away is a crucial step in anger management and the thing people with anger management difficulties struggle with the most. Having an alternative outlet for your emotion is also crucial, and Jim seems able to offfload his frustration amongst his peers, which is healthy. Humour is also a mature defence mechanism and he uses this a great deal. If he stood around screaming you'd have said he should have walked away, when he walks away you state walking away is wrong. Gott in Himmel!

:thumbs2: Great post.