people are saying '10 years ago' because the rumours say that this was a promise she made to him when they got together, which was, 10 years ago
Yes but you need to read between the lines here....10 years ago she was probably still grieving and possibly in a bad way and some agreement was perhaps made. I doubt very much those assurances were based on the future about the children when they were teenagers, I expect they were a bit more general.
Internet searching hints at Ms lawson sitting around with her teenage children at 9pm every night for a supper of waccy baccy & cocaine its allegedly known by her staff and the parents of the teenagers who are friends with Nigellas teenagers. Supposedly Nigella gave Charles assurances when they met that these "habits" would be no more.
They decided to divorce mutually and instead of a cash divorce settlement he gave her a PR coup of a staged domestic abuse in public acted scene. This to boost her flagging career in the US & UK.
This is the supposed dirt between them, whether its true or just internet crazyland who knows.
Internet crazyland, and being stirred up by Saatchi, I reckon, esp the bit in bold. I mean - how convoluted. The "domestic goddess" getting half strangled and being in an abusive relationship really wasn't much of a PR coup for her - in fact it embarrassed her and the rest of her family immensely, and was a huge threat to her newly fledged career across the pond. She also has plenty of her own wealth - didn't need Saatchi's
A far simpler explanation is that it was pretty much as it's appeared to be. Looks like a duck etc..
Yes but you need to read between the lines here....10 years ago she was probably still grieving and possibly in a bad way and some agreement was perhaps made. I doubt very much those assurances were based on the future about the children when they were teenagers, I expect they were a bit more general.
I dont need to read between any lines as I dont believe the rumours, I was just clarifying for another poster why people were using the term '10 years' as they had indicated that these 'habits' were recent
totally agree with the you Laurie about the duck thing, the abuse looked real to me
as for the drugs who knows
Indeed. There could be a seed of truth in there, perhaps (as in, she may not be averse, and they may have argued about it) although I reckon it's being magnified - the whole idea of coke-filled evenings with her own kids seems a bit deranged.
Comments
Yes but you need to read between the lines here....10 years ago she was probably still grieving and possibly in a bad way and some agreement was perhaps made. I doubt very much those assurances were based on the future about the children when they were teenagers, I expect they were a bit more general.
Internet crazyland, and being stirred up by Saatchi, I reckon, esp the bit in bold. I mean - how convoluted. The "domestic goddess" getting half strangled and being in an abusive relationship really wasn't much of a PR coup for her - in fact it embarrassed her and the rest of her family immensely, and was a huge threat to her newly fledged career across the pond. She also has plenty of her own wealth - didn't need Saatchi's
A far simpler explanation is that it was pretty much as it's appeared to be. Looks like a duck etc..
as for the drugs who knows
I dont need to read between any lines as I dont believe the rumours, I was just clarifying for another poster why people were using the term '10 years' as they had indicated that these 'habits' were recent
Indeed. There could be a seed of truth in there, perhaps (as in, she may not be averse, and they may have argued about it) although I reckon it's being magnified - the whole idea of coke-filled evenings with her own kids seems a bit deranged.
he just wants to get on with his life (after stiring up a load of rumours about her)