From what has been reported we do know that she was seeking help as she was visiting rehab and was being prescribed a heroin substitute, methadone but what we also know is whilst in sole care for her youngest son she took heroin and a significant amount that ended up causing her death. We can surmise this wasn't unusual for her but seemingly her family including her husband weren't aware.
I'm afraid it's utter naivety to believe that anyone who was in reasonably regular contact with her would not have been aware she was using. We now hear she was on a methadone script and I can assure you it is perfectly obvious, even on small maintenance doses, when someone has just taken their methadone and even more obvious when it is time for the next dose! Given the police claim there was no paraphernalia found at her home it also follows someone cleared up after her - and, given dealers don't usually hang round to see their clients shoot up for obvious reasons, there is a pretty clear inference to be drawn.
I've never done heroin, absolutely not, I have no interest in it or any other class A's. And I don't have any children. But I have done drugs, and really, other than on a hallucinogen (e.g. acid) you can actually "pull it together". You don't just get a hit and then fall asleep, you'd be awake to feel the effects. What I mean is, although deeply deeply disturbing and selfish she wouldn't necessarily have been "out of it" and unable to attend to her son. She wouldn't have been super mum but I can imagine she'd be able to change a nappy.
Also you're all presuming she was shooting up, we don't know, she could have been smoking it which is still stupid but takes the needles out of the equation. And don't think of the addict on the street - trying to score not to get high but to feel normal - it sounds like she's been quietly using for a while. That could mean one hit a day. It is possible, great artists have been hooked on smoking opium and been prolific in their work.
I just mean… well everyone is saying she's selfish (in essence that's true) but painting her like some "Trainspotting" junkie, like the addicts that left the baby to die is not necessarily fair. I don't think it means she chose drugs over her children. Addiction is a hard thing to understand but I very clearly understand that anyone that takes heroin is deeply troubled. Noone does drugs like that for a laugh, it's so intrinsically tangled with much deeper problems.
I never really liked her but I do have great sympathy for her. Addiction in any form is a difficult beast.
You don't overdose from smoking heroin. Which is one of the reasons she is so supremely selfish, if she'd smoked it she wouldn't have put herself and Phaedra at such risk but she just wanted the best hit, that was what was important. She would not have been capable of looking after a child on heroin. Not capable of changing a nappy or preparing a feed, nothing. She did choose drugs over the safety and well being of her child.
It's nothing like speed or a pill, you can't function properly.
Why on earth? Social services would need an exceptionally strong reason to remove children from their father's care, and there appears to be no reason at all in this case. The article you link claims that she kept her drug problems secret from her husband because he was such a 'straight family man'. Well good for him. A straight family man is just what they need right now. And not a grandparent who, according to an earlier Mail article, did not even live in the same house as his daughters when they were growing up, but had one house for him and his girlfriend and another house for his children and nanny.
Jade Goody proved how taking an atrocious childhood and learning from it so that you don't make the same mistake with your own children and was why I admired her as a mother to those two boys of hers..
Jade had an exceptionally dreadful childhood, and did well to avoid the same mistakes, but imo she made a very bad mistake of her own. It was appalling watching the very young children being stalked by paparazzi all the time, even in their school playground. As soon as Jeff Brazier told them that the party was over, the paparazzi backed off totally and permanently, which is what should have been done from the start.
Why? He's done a good enough job with his other three girls. Just because one child out of four goes off the rails does not mean bad parenting. Maybe he was distant because of Peache's behaviour, there is only so much one can do to help an addict. .
I get the impression that Bob - this is speculation - powerfully identified with Peaches, which is why he could deny her nothing. Everyone seems to agree that Bob Geldof was a ferociously ambitious young man, consumed with a desire for fame and success. So when his still-teenage daughter fancied a media career, he saw his own past, and determined to give her what he would have wanted at that age. But it was imo a dreadful strategy. Taking a young girl with no experience, no expertise, nothing to say, and giving her a fully staffed magazine to edit - she MUST have known with what contempt her editorship was regarded. And in the world of tv she was constantly working with sharp, dedicated, passionately knowledgable people who had done all the groundwork to get where they were, and must have known how very little respect any of them had for her bought-and-paid-for role.
How much better to take the David Bowie path; if your child wants to be a film director, you don't just buy him a film crew and fund the film, but make him learn his craft, start at the bottom, gain respect like anyone else, then produce work that is based on merit. Are we going to see Duncan Jones splashed all over the papers with a drug problem? I would be amazed. He has learned, over the years, the very ordinary lessons of working and waiting. Peaches never did.
I guess they will all still keep harping on about what a wonderful, funny, bonkers person she was. I think it's time they stopped fooling themselves and admitted that she was on drugs and cared about them more than she did her own babies.
Do you think that Bob, with the news of his young daughter's death brand new in his mind, should have thought it a good opportunity to say harsh things about her? Because I don't.
I'm afraid it's utter naivety to believe that anyone who was in reasonably regular contact with her would not have been aware she was using. We now hear she was on a methadone script and I can assure you it is perfectly obvious, even on small maintenance doses, when someone has just taken their methadone and even more obvious when it is time for the next dose! Given the police claim there was no paraphernalia found at her home it also follows someone cleared up after her - and, given dealers don't usually hang round to see their clients shoot up for obvious reasons, there is a pretty clear inference to be drawn.
Well we can only really work with what we've been told and that is that people around her didn't know though personally I concur with you. However, my point wasn't that so much as the hypocrisy element. There seems to be so much understanding of this woman but if this story was about an unknown working class woman: choosing a heroin hit whilst at treatment and having access to methadone and whilst solely caring for a baby Imagine it :cool:
If she was getting proper support which she was taking seriously she would have been taking a substitute, not injecting heroin. Plus she wouldn't have had to keep it a secret to the point where she would have been taking drugs at home on her own with a baby alone in the other room.
Many users get a regular methadone script and take street heroin. They aren't supposed to but they do. All the support in the world doesn't stop people doing what they want to do. You paint the picture as if this was a desperate woman with no support and no choices instead of a rich, rather indulged young woman who, tragically lost a parent but otherwise lacked for nothing all her life. She chose to write articles and give interviews advising how other people could live their lives better and, recently, be better parents. It was the hypocrisy of her situation which drove secrecy not a lack of support.
Well we can only really work with what we've been told and that is that people around her didn't know though personally I concur with you. However, my point wasn't that so much as the hypocrisy element. There seems to be so much understanding of this woman but if this story was about an unknown working class woman: choosing a heroin hit whilst at treatment and having access to methadone and whilst solely caring for a baby Imagine it :cool:
Oh I agree with all that you say there but then Sir Bob has always run a ferocious PR team!!
To be honest I've never thought 'Saint Bob' was all that, not his music, his charity stuff, home stuff, something not quite right about him. Always seemed like a flawed family with poor Paula finding our Hughie Green was her father and all her other problems.
But the girl did apparently choose drugs over her child and that is a tragedy.
I believe there is more to come of all this over time.
Many users get a regular methadone script and take street heroin. They aren't supposed to but they do. All the support in the world doesn't stop people doing what they want to do. You paint the picture as if this was a desperate woman with no support and no choices instead of a rich, rather indulged young woman who, tragically lost a parent but otherwise lacked for nothing all her life. She chose to write articles and give interviews advising how other people could live their lives better and, recently, be better parents. It was the hypocrisy of her situation which drove secrecy not a lack of support.
Yes I'm aware of that. I agree with you about the rest of it too, I was responding to another poster who was saying that the situation was not Peaches fault it was just because she 'wasn't being supported'. Obviously Peaches was well aware of the opportunity of gaining support and knew how to access it. But rather than finding support to get off drugs she instead exploited a service in order to supplement her drug intake.
I don't get why some of you are grieving for her so much? She was hardly Lady Di!
Did she do much for charity? Save your grief and tears for when someone close to you dies.
She did a bang up PR job. She took drugs whilst alone with her child, probably more than once and was prepared to neglect them to take drugs.
But she put some pretty pictures up on instagram and said she loved them on Twitter so she must have been a rilly great Mum rather than someone who knew the value of marketing herself as one in order to keep the cash flowing in to fund her drug habit.
Why are some blaming Bob Geldof for Peaches demise... She was 25 lived in her own home with a husband and 2 children.. She was responsible for her own actions ... Why do people keep wanting to point the finger at someone else
To be honest I've never thought 'Saint Bob' was all that, not his music, his charity stuff, home stuff, something not quite right about him. Always seemed like a flawed family with poor Paula finding our Hughie Green was her father and all her other problems.
But the girl did apparently choose drugs over her child and that is a tragedy.
I believe there is more to come of all this over time.
What do you mean by " his charity stuff"? What Bob and Midge did getting theBand Aid concert and record together was brilliant...
Jade Goody proved how taking an atrocious childhood and learning from it so that you don't make the same mistake with your own children and was why I admired her as a mother to those two boys of hers. Jade had nowhere near the secure and privileged upbringing that the Geldof girls had. She had to mother her own mother and feed herself as well. Paula was a drug addict for a relatively short time whereas Jade grew up around her mother's drug paraphernalia and when she hit fame and fortune she used it to build a secure home and life for her children rather than use the excuse of childhood trauma to destroy her health and endanger her future with her children.
It is so sad that nature stepped in and did it for her.
That's a very revisionist version of Jade Goody.
You've chosen to ignore the horrible, bullying behaviour she exhibited towards Shilpa Shetty and that the latter part of her "career" was steered and guided by that pillar of society, Max Clifford. Still, if you're taken in by the Machiavellian child molestors version of events, that's entirely up to you.
Don't be ridiculous. His parents are more than capable of caring for the children before you start jumping on your high horse and shipping these kids off to foster homes.
And you can tell he isn't a user. His face is too fresh. He might have long hippie hair but he has beautiful skin and his eyes are bright and alert.
The pic Peaches posted of her and the dog is what one would expect a junkie to look like. Thin, pale, red eyes sunk in.
I thought quite the reverse. He looked pale and unhealthy, his eyes looked lifeless and, to me anyway, he looked well out of it. That was old photos incidentally not recent ones where you would expect him to look strained.
I think Peaches probably thought it'd be good to have.kids to get away from the lifestyle she had. But that'd the problem- you shouldn't have kids to solve your own issues. Having kids brings its own stresses, seems she over idealised parenthood & tried to live up to an impossible standard, felt guilty when she couldn't live up to it & got high as either addiction or stress relief.
Having kids isn't a way to heal yourself of emotional problems. It sounds like she was too young to have them IMO
I agree with this. I really don't think Peaches was mature or together enough to become a mother. She had a lot of issues and problems, and bringing two babies into the situation was not ideal. I don't believe someone can just turn their life around overnight. It takes a lot of time, and Peaches had a lot of growing up to do. She seemed to seize on motherhood as some kind of outward sign that she had changed, but inside she was still a mixed up person with a self destructive streak (very like her mum). I think she was very much playing at the whole idyllic motherhood, picnics in the park scenario, but it was never the reality of her life. It this tragic accident hadn't happened, I think there would have been further indications that her life wasn't really as she was painting it.
Very sad. I hope her sons manage to break the vicious cycle and that her husband will eventually be able to move on and lead a normal, happy life.
I don't get why some of you are grieving for her so much? She was hardly Lady Di!
Did she do much for charity? Save your grief and tears for when someone close to you dies.
I am not sure what story you are writing here. As a matter of fact, she WAS a bit like Princess Diana. They were both rootless, insecure young women who were thrust into an intense public spotlight before they had even half grown up. To make up for a lack of education or solid achievement, they both developed an acute eye for what would play in the mass media. And they both died in circumstances that had an element of reckless foolishness.
I have no idea what Peaches did for charity, but I always think celeb charity 'work' is morally neutral; it generally involved nothing more arduous than attending a dinner, a party or a workplace and saying a few charming remarks. No reason why people shouldn't do it, but it bears no relation to the patient army of trustees and treasurers doing all the dull background work for no reward, let alone to the immensely courageous people doing frontline charity work in volatile and violent parts of the world.
I am sure most of us save our deep grief for the loss of those we know and love. But that does not mean we are not entitled to a moment of sadness when someone young dies very suddenly.
I thought quite the reverse. He looked pale and unhealthy, his eyes looked lifeless and, to me anyway, he looked well out of it. That was old photos incidentally not recent ones where you would expect him to look strained.
I think it's impossible to tell a drug addict/abuser just from looking at a photograph. Some drug addicts look like they abuse drugs and some don't, some people look rough and pale as though they abuse drugs but in fact have never touched them.
That aside I am slightly curious about this unnamed source, supposedly from a rehab centre Peaches was attending, suddenly coming forward in todays Sun. He didn't divulge much but the bits of info he did give, well he seemed to have a purpose. Also would anybody from a rehab place really be speaking out, that puzzles me. I know the girl is dead but wouldn't that go massively against some addiction help code of conduct?
I thought quite the reverse. He looked pale and unhealthy, his eyes looked lifeless and, to me anyway, he looked well out of it. That was old photos incidentally not recent ones where you would expect him to look strained.
I don't know how much you can realistically tell from people's appearances in paparazzi shots, but I haven't come across any photos of Tom (and I used to see a fair bit of him in music publications prior to the more widely-seen photos of him with Peaches and/or their sons) that flagged up anything untoward to me. Have you got any examples? (Sorry if that sounds snarky, it's not meant to be - genuinely asking so I can look for myself).
I am not sure what story you are writing here. As a matter of fact, she WAS a bit like Princess Diana. They were both rootless, insecure young women who were thrust into an intense public spotlight before they had even half grown up. To make up for a lack of education or solid achievement, they both developed an acute eye for what would play in the mass media. And they both died in circumstances that had an element of reckless foolishness.
I have no idea what Peaches did for charity, but I always think celeb charity 'work' is morally neutral; it generally involved nothing more arduous than attending a dinner, a party or a workplace and saying a few charming remarks. No reason why people shouldn't do it, but it bears no relation to the patient army of trustees and treasurers doing all the dull background work for no reward, let alone to the immensely courageous people doing frontline charity work in volatile and violent parts of the world.
I am sure most of us save our deep grief for the loss of those we know and love. But that does not mean we are not entitled to a moment of sadness when someone young dies very suddenly.
I assume you are referring to the fact that Diana wasn't wearing a seat belt ? I don't think abusing a class A drug whilst in charge of a baby is comparable to not buckling up .
Diana bore no similarity to Peaches whatsoever in my opinion .One had the establishment firmly against her and was battling to make the world a better place by raising much needed awareness .The other was an affluent young woman who had lost her mother young - like many people have . She chose to emulate her mother despite knowing the possible outcome of dabbling with drugs more than most .
I'm not surprised that people have had a change of heart re sympathy for her .
I assume you are referring to the fact that Diana wasn't wearing a seat belt ? I don't think abusing a class A drug whilst in charge of a baby is comparable to not buckling up .
Diana bore no similarity to Peaches whatsoever in my opinion .One had the establishment firmly against her and was battling to make the world a better place by raising much needed awareness .The other was an affluent young woman who had lost her mother young - like many people have . She chose to emulate her mother despite knowing the possible outcome of dabbling with drugs more than most .
I'm not surprised that people have had a change of heart re sympathy for her .
What good it does anyone rescinding sympathy when the young woman in question is as dead today as she was on 7 April is beyond me.
She did a bang up PR job. She took drugs whilst alone with her child, probably more than once and was prepared to neglect them to take drugs.
But she put some pretty pictures up on instagram and said she loved them on Twitter so she must have been a rilly great Mum rather than someone who knew the value of marketing herself as one in order to keep the cash flowing in to fund her drug habit.
Wow.. you worked all that out from one possible drugs overdose? You should have gone to the police the day she died and saved them all their trouble and tests.
Someone passes away due to possible drugs consumption and suddenly lots of people on the internet seem to think they're experts on the persons life and know all their secrets, all their addictions and all their motivations for their actions. Did you know her personally? I doubt it. So how could you possibly know she had a drug habit and was using her children to fund it? That's a disgusting thing to accuse anyone of.
I find the lack of empathy on here by some FMs quite sad, people's sudden removal of any sympathy they had about Peaches dying now gone because of how she died.
Everyone knows heroin's a mugs game but nobody knows the reason why people, of any class are drawn to it.
The sad fact is a young (obviously troubled) woman has died, leaving 2 babies to grow up not knowing their Mum, how she died is irrelevant as it doesn't change a thing.
Quote from the article "Wearing a hoodie to disguise her, a source has claimed Peaches visited a drugs rehab centre in Maidstone, not far from the home she shared with her husband and two sons, before her death.
The man told The Sun: 'We were on first name terms but I called her 'P'.
'I last saw her a couple of weeks ago. She was fine but furtive.'
He said Peaches revealed she did not want husband Tom Cohen to find out she was in treatment, describing him as a 'really straight family man', adding he would not understand.
'She didn't want her husband finding out,' he added. 'She said he was completely straight and that Dad would go spare if he knew anything about it.' "
From what has been reported we do know that she was seeking help as she was visiting rehab and was being prescribed a heroin substitute, methadone but what we also know is whilst in sole care for her youngest son she took heroin and a significant amount that ended up causing her death. We can surmise this wasn't unusual for her but seemingly her family including her husband weren't aware.
I just think that if this was a working class woman living on a council estate all we would hear is a response of disgust and horror and cries of what is the world coming to particularly from the Mail who seem to be reporting this without any criticism whatsoever. Why I'm not sure but I know the hypocrisy of it all sickens me.
Who is the criticism meant to be aimed at, and what would it achieve? Peaches Geldof has paid the ultimate price and her family and presumably Toms, are left to pick up the pieces. There are no winners on this situation, whatever 'class' you happen to come from.
Comments
I'm afraid it's utter naivety to believe that anyone who was in reasonably regular contact with her would not have been aware she was using. We now hear she was on a methadone script and I can assure you it is perfectly obvious, even on small maintenance doses, when someone has just taken their methadone and even more obvious when it is time for the next dose! Given the police claim there was no paraphernalia found at her home it also follows someone cleared up after her - and, given dealers don't usually hang round to see their clients shoot up for obvious reasons, there is a pretty clear inference to be drawn.
You don't overdose from smoking heroin. Which is one of the reasons she is so supremely selfish, if she'd smoked it she wouldn't have put herself and Phaedra at such risk but she just wanted the best hit, that was what was important. She would not have been capable of looking after a child on heroin. Not capable of changing a nappy or preparing a feed, nothing. She did choose drugs over the safety and well being of her child.
It's nothing like speed or a pill, you can't function properly.
How much better to take the David Bowie path; if your child wants to be a film director, you don't just buy him a film crew and fund the film, but make him learn his craft, start at the bottom, gain respect like anyone else, then produce work that is based on merit. Are we going to see Duncan Jones splashed all over the papers with a drug problem? I would be amazed. He has learned, over the years, the very ordinary lessons of working and waiting. Peaches never did. She herself said that she had missed several appointments because she was frightened.
Do you think that Bob, with the news of his young daughter's death brand new in his mind, should have thought it a good opportunity to say harsh things about her? Because I don't.
Well we can only really work with what we've been told and that is that people around her didn't know though personally I concur with you. However, my point wasn't that so much as the hypocrisy element. There seems to be so much understanding of this woman but if this story was about an unknown working class woman: choosing a heroin hit whilst at treatment and having access to methadone and whilst solely caring for a baby
Many users get a regular methadone script and take street heroin. They aren't supposed to but they do. All the support in the world doesn't stop people doing what they want to do. You paint the picture as if this was a desperate woman with no support and no choices instead of a rich, rather indulged young woman who, tragically lost a parent but otherwise lacked for nothing all her life. She chose to write articles and give interviews advising how other people could live their lives better and, recently, be better parents. It was the hypocrisy of her situation which drove secrecy not a lack of support.
Oh I agree with all that you say there but then Sir Bob has always run a ferocious PR team!!
Did she do much for charity? Save your grief and tears for when someone close to you dies.
But the girl did apparently choose drugs over her child and that is a tragedy.
I believe there is more to come of all this over time.
Who's grieving for her? I don't see anyone grieving for her.
Yes I'm aware of that. I agree with you about the rest of it too, I was responding to another poster who was saying that the situation was not Peaches fault it was just because she 'wasn't being supported'. Obviously Peaches was well aware of the opportunity of gaining support and knew how to access it. But rather than finding support to get off drugs she instead exploited a service in order to supplement her drug intake.
She did a bang up PR job. She took drugs whilst alone with her child, probably more than once and was prepared to neglect them to take drugs.
But she put some pretty pictures up on instagram and said she loved them on Twitter so she must have been a rilly great Mum rather than someone who knew the value of marketing herself as one in order to keep the cash flowing in to fund her drug habit.
What do you mean by " his charity stuff"? What Bob and Midge did getting theBand Aid concert and record together was brilliant...
That's a very revisionist version of Jade Goody.
You've chosen to ignore the horrible, bullying behaviour she exhibited towards Shilpa Shetty and that the latter part of her "career" was steered and guided by that pillar of society, Max Clifford. Still, if you're taken in by the Machiavellian child molestors version of events, that's entirely up to you.
I thought quite the reverse. He looked pale and unhealthy, his eyes looked lifeless and, to me anyway, he looked well out of it. That was old photos incidentally not recent ones where you would expect him to look strained.
I agree with this. I really don't think Peaches was mature or together enough to become a mother. She had a lot of issues and problems, and bringing two babies into the situation was not ideal. I don't believe someone can just turn their life around overnight. It takes a lot of time, and Peaches had a lot of growing up to do. She seemed to seize on motherhood as some kind of outward sign that she had changed, but inside she was still a mixed up person with a self destructive streak (very like her mum). I think she was very much playing at the whole idyllic motherhood, picnics in the park scenario, but it was never the reality of her life. It this tragic accident hadn't happened, I think there would have been further indications that her life wasn't really as she was painting it.
Very sad. I hope her sons manage to break the vicious cycle and that her husband will eventually be able to move on and lead a normal, happy life.
I am not sure what story you are writing here. As a matter of fact, she WAS a bit like Princess Diana. They were both rootless, insecure young women who were thrust into an intense public spotlight before they had even half grown up. To make up for a lack of education or solid achievement, they both developed an acute eye for what would play in the mass media. And they both died in circumstances that had an element of reckless foolishness.
I have no idea what Peaches did for charity, but I always think celeb charity 'work' is morally neutral; it generally involved nothing more arduous than attending a dinner, a party or a workplace and saying a few charming remarks. No reason why people shouldn't do it, but it bears no relation to the patient army of trustees and treasurers doing all the dull background work for no reward, let alone to the immensely courageous people doing frontline charity work in volatile and violent parts of the world.
I am sure most of us save our deep grief for the loss of those we know and love. But that does not mean we are not entitled to a moment of sadness when someone young dies very suddenly.
I think it's impossible to tell a drug addict/abuser just from looking at a photograph. Some drug addicts look like they abuse drugs and some don't, some people look rough and pale as though they abuse drugs but in fact have never touched them.
That aside I am slightly curious about this unnamed source, supposedly from a rehab centre Peaches was attending, suddenly coming forward in todays Sun. He didn't divulge much but the bits of info he did give, well he seemed to have a purpose. Also would anybody from a rehab place really be speaking out, that puzzles me. I know the girl is dead but wouldn't that go massively against some addiction help code of conduct?
I don't know how much you can realistically tell from people's appearances in paparazzi shots, but I haven't come across any photos of Tom (and I used to see a fair bit of him in music publications prior to the more widely-seen photos of him with Peaches and/or their sons) that flagged up anything untoward to me. Have you got any examples? (Sorry if that sounds snarky, it's not meant to be - genuinely asking so I can look for myself).
Diana bore no similarity to Peaches whatsoever in my opinion .One had the establishment firmly against her and was battling to make the world a better place by raising much needed awareness .The other was an affluent young woman who had lost her mother young - like many people have . She chose to emulate her mother despite knowing the possible outcome of dabbling with drugs more than most .
I'm not surprised that people have had a change of heart re sympathy for her .
What good it does anyone rescinding sympathy when the young woman in question is as dead today as she was on 7 April is beyond me.
Wow.. you worked all that out from one possible drugs overdose? You should have gone to the police the day she died and saved them all their trouble and tests.
Someone passes away due to possible drugs consumption and suddenly lots of people on the internet seem to think they're experts on the persons life and know all their secrets, all their addictions and all their motivations for their actions. Did you know her personally? I doubt it. So how could you possibly know she had a drug habit and was using her children to fund it? That's a disgusting thing to accuse anyone of.
Everyone knows heroin's a mugs game but nobody knows the reason why people, of any class are drawn to it.
The sad fact is a young (obviously troubled) woman has died, leaving 2 babies to grow up not knowing their Mum, how she died is irrelevant as it doesn't change a thing.
I don't see why
Quote from the article "Wearing a hoodie to disguise her, a source has claimed Peaches visited a drugs rehab centre in Maidstone, not far from the home she shared with her husband and two sons, before her death.
The man told The Sun: 'We were on first name terms but I called her 'P'.
'I last saw her a couple of weeks ago. She was fine but furtive.'
He said Peaches revealed she did not want husband Tom Cohen to find out she was in treatment, describing him as a 'really straight family man', adding he would not understand.
'She didn't want her husband finding out,' he added. 'She said he was completely straight and that Dad would go spare if he knew anything about it.' "
Who is the criticism meant to be aimed at, and what would it achieve? Peaches Geldof has paid the ultimate price and her family and presumably Toms, are left to pick up the pieces. There are no winners on this situation, whatever 'class' you happen to come from.