Are you on Team Nigella?

[cee-dee]

So, now the case is over and those two PA's have been found not guilty of fraud, shouldn't they now face a charge of blackmail?

They claimed they'd been allowed to use those credit cards to keep quiet about the alleged drug addiction of NL so doesn't that amount to blackmail?

[saasher2012]

I'm sorry , but I have no sympathy for any of them, they are all as bad as one another.

[joe_bloggs*]

Why this is headline news is beyond me,A bully and a cokehead more suited to the Jeremy Kyle show,Domestic goddess? give me a break

[sir_arthur_strebe-grebling]

Self-obsessed junkie: no wonder the BBC loves her.

[electric*mayhem*band]

To both your questions, and to quote the ID of a past poster - 'likeanyonecares'.

[ed_blackadder_1]

Too much airtime given to the whole thing, they live lives that are so far removed from the majority in this country that I really am not interested. and still the BBC keep putting out her programmes, I have never liked watching her because I always found her patronising with her parties and fabulous store cupboard, 

So not on team Nigella sorry.

[right-then-petal]

hmmm well she could stay and do brekie but then leave

[ronnybabes]

What an uninteresting Topic..

Who cares.. ?? 

[al**bear]

You should read about Her & her siblings upbringing, the Nigel Lawson household, really really weird

[*.*..lola..*.*]

What a truly vile pair - proof, if ever it was needed, that no amount of money can buy class!

[**caution**opinion_ahead]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

So, now the case is over and those two PA's have been found not guilty of fraud, shouldn't they now face a charge of blackmail?

---

Shouldn't Nigella face charges for purchasing and using illegal substances?

And who says the PAs were blackmailing?  AFAIA, they had never threatened to expose her behaviour.  Indeed, they were not even going to mention it in their defence until the photos from the restaurant were released.  And bear in mind, another former PA came forward and said Saatchi had tried the same thing with her and other previous employees.

And, frankly, whose fault was it the total spend got so high?  Why was the accountant not accounting?  Why were parameters for spending not set out up front?  If you can't be bothered to monitor your financial affairs properly and run your household expenses efficiently, that's your problem ... IMV.

[cee-dee]

There's an old saying "A fool and his money are soon parted" and that applies to those doing business with "The (un)happy couple".

It's quite true that no amount of money can buy class, the Nouveau-Riche are only rich riff-raff and it continually shows.

I agree that the accountants didn't do a proper job and in my view, the prosecution also did a very poor job in allowing the defence to turn the trial of the two PA's in to a trial of NL. Also, I'd have thought the charge should have been embezzlement, not fraud.

It came out that the PA's said that they were allowed to do as they liked with the credit cards in return for keeping quiet about the "drug use" of NL. Sounds like blackmail to me.

Whenever there's any adverse happenings in the life of "rich" people, I see envy and jealousy clouding the issue and that's quite evident in this case. The song "A satisfied mind" springs to mind, the line "If I had his money, I'd do things my way" being at the forefront.

[**caution**opinion_ahead]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

It came out that the PA's said that they were allowed to do as they liked with the credit cards in return for keeping quiet about the "drug use" of NL. Sounds like blackmail to me.

---

That is not the definition of blackmail, CD.  To blackmail someone, you approach them and say "Unless you do X, I will do Y".  There is no evidence that this happened here.  It sounds more like a verbal non-disclosure agreement, that lots of famous and/or wealthy people have with staff, ie don't talk about what happens inside, outside.  That's pretty standard.  So Nigella sweetened it with monetary freedom.  That was her choice.  There is no evidence the PAs made it a condition of their silence.  They sound as though they were exceptionally loyal and hard-working employees to me, albeit ones who made the most of the job perks.

[cee-dee]

Made the most of it? They sure did.

They might as well have thrown in embezzlement and blackmail for good measure, the prosecution strategy was very poor.

[**caution**opinion_ahead]

Well, if we are criticising people for making the most of job perks, there'd be a whole queue of people in front of these two PAs.  MP expenses spring to mind, or banker bonuses.  Or all those company board members in hospitality tents at Goodwood and Henley and so on. 

If Saatchi didn't like what they were spending, the first time they went over the mark he should have reined them in, pure and simple.  It is not a matter for the courts to sort out what he failed to oversee.  The whole case was a waste of public money. 

[cee-dee]

That's not an argument that holds water because there have been many, many cases where someone has taken advantage of poor and ineffective accounting to get away with fraud and embezzlement. Many were jailed and made to pay back what could be recovered.

[**caution**opinion_ahead]

If parameters had been set, and they exceeded these, fair enough.  If they attempted to hide their spending, fair enough.  However, it would seem neither of these were the case.  Therefore, I don't see how it can be fraud.

They were given a credit card and allowed to use it as they liked.  This they did.  There was, presumably, a monthly account and at any point, their spending could have been challenged.  It was not. 

[cee-dee]

That won't wash either because they were told to take their salary and get other things for the household but no way would anyone sanction "oh yes, help yourself to three-quarters of a million for yourselves".

They've been through a trial now and the jury found for them due to an inept prosecution and a clever, attacking defence. They got away with it so no doubt they'll be celebrating?

[**caution**opinion_ahead]

Saatchi has a civil case ongoing against them.  (It should have stayed as a civil case, IMV.)  Their assets are frozen or seized.  I guess it is a little early for them to celebrate. 

The jury found for them presumably as there was no deceit involved.  Had they bought designer outfits and logged this as family dry cleaning, or made up expenses and pocketed the cash (as MPs are wont to do), that would have been a different case altogether.

[cee-dee]

We'll just have to wait and see what happens next?