[Livia]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

At least this problem is now out in the open and can be addressed, his behaviour by all accounts amounts to assault and he could well find himself in trouble with the police.

Also, any divorce proceedings filed by her on the grounds of physical and mental cruelty will now carry much more weight after his actions were witnessed and photographed. He may not realise it now but that little episode may well cost him millions in a massive divorce settlement....!!!!

Any divorce proceedings that were filed (assuming it gets that far on the strength of a story in the tabloids), his lawyers I assume would insist these photos were inadmissible. They were taken covertly without the permission of either party and what is going on is a matter for conjecture.

I would imagine his behaviour only amounts to assault if she presses charges. And frankly, you'd have a problem making that stick on the strength of those photos.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Livia

Any divorce proceedings that were filed (assuming it gets that far on the strength of a story in the tabloids), his lawyers I assume would insist these photos were inadmissible. They were taken covertly without the permission of either party and what is going on is a matter for conjecture.

I would imagine his behaviour only amounts to assault if she presses charges. And frankly, you'd have a problem making that stick on the strength of those photos.

Maybe legally speaking these events are not evidence but the fact it happened and was witnessed and photographed and splashed onto the front covers of most tabloid newspapers does add some weight to Nigella's divorce petition. It at least strengthens her hand if she sues for divorce on grounds of physical/Mental abuse.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Maybe legally speaking these events are not evidence but the fact it happened and was witnessed and photographed and splashed onto the front covers of most tabloid newspapers does add some weight to Nigella's divorce petition. It at least strengthens her hand if she sues for divorce on grounds of physical/Mental abuse.

From the daily mail article pictures i saw, she at one point is clearly looking at the cameras, also she is eating in a very public place. I think she knows damn well that she is being watched. if she actually was in any kind of distress or danger, why wouldn't she say no or stop him or cry out for help?

This all just feels like a publicity stunt to me.

Nigella Lawson is the new Amanda Bynes.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by lostalex

From the daily mail article pictures i saw, she at one point is clearly looking at the cameras, also she is eating in a very public place. I think she knows damn well that she is being watched. if she actually was in any kind of distress or danger, why wouldn't she say no or stop him or cry out for help?

This all just feels like a publicity stunt to me.

Nigella Lawson is the new Amanda Bynes.

Publicity Stunt.........???? for what purpose ???

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Publicity Stunt.........???? for what purpose ???

umm, usually the purpose of a publicity stunt is, umm... PUBLICITY.

pub·lic·i·ty (p-bls-t)
n.
1.
a. Information that concerns a person, group, event, or product and that is disseminated through various media to attract public notice.
b. Public interest, notice, or notoriety achieved by the spreading of such information.
c. The act, process, or occupation of disseminating information to gain public interest.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by lostalex

umm, usually the purpose of a publicity stunt is, umm... PUBLICITY.

pub·lic·i·ty (p-bls-t)
n.
1.
a. Information that concerns a person, group, event, or product and that is disseminated through various media to attract public notice.
b. Public interest, notice, or notoriety achieved by the spreading of such information.
c. The act, process, or occupation of disseminating information to gain public interest.

Yes I know what Publicity is.......BUT for what purpose...

She is already rich
She is already famous
She is Beautiful
She is currently on our TV screens

what would be the point of this type of Publicity ???

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Yes I know what Publicity is.......BUT for what purpose...

She is already rich
She is already famous
She is Beautiful
She is currently on our TV screens

what would be the point of this type of Publicity ???

attention. some people need it like sex and oxygen.

Just ask Girth, he obviously understands the need for attention.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by lostalex

From the daily mail article pictures i saw, she at one point is clearly looking at the cameras, also she is eating in a very public place. I think she knows damn well that she is being watched. if she actually was in any kind of distress or danger, why wouldn't she say no or stop him or cry out for help?

This all just feels like a publicity stunt to me.

Nigella Lawson is the new Amanda Bynes.

Who's Amanda Bynes .....

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Omah

Who's Amanda Bynes .....

She's a former nickelodeon star that thinks everyone is ugly.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by lostalex

From the daily mail article pictures i saw, she at one point is clearly looking at the cameras, also she is eating in a very public place. I think she knows damn well that she is being watched. if she actually was in any kind of distress or danger, why wouldn't she say no or stop him or cry out for help?

This all just feels like a publicity stunt to me.

Nigella Lawson is the new Amanda Bynes.

But in all seriousness, a lot of the "celebs" that get papped are looking at the camera. They can see them.

Sometimes they don't care about being discreet and will shove the camera in people's faces without another thought.

So, not necessarily proof of any stunt.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Maybe legally speaking these events are not evidence but the fact it happened and was witnessed and photographed and splashed onto the front covers of most tabloid newspapers does add some weight to Nigella's divorce petition. It at least strengthens her hand if she sues for divorce on grounds of physical/Mental abuse.

It really doesn't. It makes her a victim in the media, but it would add nothing at all to a divorce petition. Anyway, she wouldn't need her hand strengthened; it's easy enough to get a divorce. This whole thing is about selling newspapers. Nothing more.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Livia

It really doesn't. It makes her a victim in the media, but it would add nothing at all to a divorce petition. Anyway, she wouldn't need her hand strengthened; it's easy enough to get a divorce. This whole thing is about selling newspapers. Nothing more.

I suppose the story could have been hyped up by the media, as I've said in one of my earlier posts not every picture tells the correct story.

My point to all of this is if she and her husband are having a difficult time and she is caught in a relationship which is becoming more and more physically abusive, this abuse may be kept hidden only happening in private. But as the relationship deteriorates the abuse will intensify and this may have been one of those times when Mr Saatchi lost control in a public place.

Now it may be she does want to leave him and get divorced but the grounds of that divorce would be hard to prove ie his word against hers. however this public display of aggression could strengthen her hand as part of a wider divorce petition citing physical and mental cruelty as the main reasons for the separation. Any Public knowledge of abusive behaviour by him could allow other witnesses to come forward and ultimately tip the size of any settlement well and truly in her favour...!!!!

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Any Public knowledge of abusive behaviour by him could allow other witnesses to come forward and ultimately tip the size of any settlement well and truly in her favour...!!!!

His previous wife, Kay, divorced him for unreasonable behaviour but had to sell their home as part of the divorce settlement, probably as a result of a pre-nuptial agreement .....

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Omah

His previous wife, Kay, divorced him for unreasonable behaviour but had to sell their home as part of the divorce settlement, probably as a result of a pre-nuptial agreement .....

Honestly... I wasted my time at uni. I could have just come on here and picked it up from all you barrack-room lawyers. You've all taken a couple of photographs and made a whole epic fantasy tale out of them.

It's not like he had his hands round her throat and his knee on her chest, is it. They're at a pavement table at a restaurant, surrounded by people, and I wouldn't say she looks particularly distressed. These photos would not help her in a divorce case.

His previous divorce has nothing to do with this, and for the record, around 1 in 5 divorces cite "unreasonable behaviour" so it's not like his case was unique.

And that's all from me. I think this story had had enough publicity.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Livia

Honestly... I wasted my time at uni. I could have just come on here and picked it up from all you barrack-room lawyers. You've all taken a couple of photographs and made a whole epic fantasy tale out of them.

It's not like he had his hands round her throat and his knee on her chest, is it. They're at a pavement table at a restaurant, surrounded by people, and I wouldn't say she looks particularly distressed. These photos would not help her in a divorce case.

His previous divorce has nothing to do with this, and for the record, around 1 in 5 divorces cite "unreasonable behaviour" so it's not like his case was unique.

And that's all from me. I think this story had had enough publicity.

No need to get all high and mighty just because you've had some legal training.

The points I raised in my last post are perfectly reasonable and other posters agree also that his behaviour however intended does not show him in a good light.......Nuff said !!!!!!