looks like he his feeling her neck glands also he his holding her hand I don;t think it is anything serious at least i hope its not
I dont know why this post is accused of trolling, that was my first thought, she is holding hands with him, the fact that his hand is not tensed and she is semi smiling in one of the photos says to me this is not what the media are claiming.
shame on anyone accusing someone of being abusive when they are not
The first thing one would do if someone was squeezing your neck to the point you can't breathe, would be to try and prize their fingers off.
As somebody pointed out, your average pap camera, or any camera for that matter, would likely have a fairly high shutter speed so the pictures we've seen could have literally taken a few seconds in 'real time' so she could still have reacted by trying to grab his hands.
That said, he doesn't have to be throttling her either - grabbing someone by the throat, even of only for a few seconds, is, in itself, a highly threatening gesture and doesn't need to progress into a full on throttling. Her reaction is explainable in one of two ways.
Firstly, as someone pointed out, he could be suffering from dementia and lashing out. Her "passive" reaction could be her way of dealing with the situation and trying to calm him down and pacify him.
Secondly, there could be far more serious abuse going on behind closed doors and her reaction was simply one of fear. Many people often 'freeze' in fear in certain situations and this could well be why she doesn't appear to try and defend herself.
I dont know why this post is accused of trolling, that was my first thought, she is holding hands with him, the fact that his hand is not tensed and she is semi smiling in one of the photos says to me this is not what the media are claiming.
shame on anyone accusing someone of being abusive when they are not
You really think this picture is "not what the media are claiming" ???
The alternative then is to assume that these pictures are absolute proof that man was throttling, yes *throttling* his wife in a restaurant, in which situation she isn't doing anything about it, both are orderly seated, and no-one is intervening.
This thread shows amply why and how the paps have such an influence on the chronically impressionable.
You can see fear in her face,that is quite disturbing, then the pic afterwards tells it all, if in fact she is being abused by this man, then I hope she has the guts to report him.
As somebody pointed out, your average pap camera, or any camera for that matter, would likely have a fairly high shutter speed so the pictures we've seen could have literally taken a few seconds in 'real time' so she could still have reacted by trying to grab his hands.
That said, he doesn't have to be throttling her either - grabbing someone by the throat, even of only for a few seconds, is, in itself, a highly threatening gesture and doesn't need to progress into a full on throttling. Her reaction is explainable in one of two ways.
Firstly, as someone pointed out, he could be suffering from dementia and lashing out. Her "passive" reaction could be her way of dealing with the situation and trying to calm him down and pacify him.
Secondly, there could be far more serious abuse going on behind closed doors and her reaction was simply one of fear. Many people often 'freeze' in fear in certain situations and this could well be why she doesn't appear to try and defend herself.
You really think this picture is "not what the media are claiming" ???
no, it doesnt give any evidence either way, i dont know why he is doing that, my partner will sometimes feel for lumps and bumps on me, he will press quite hard as hes not sure what hes looking for. its her calmness throughout that suggests to me that something else could be going on. people do argue, sometimes loudly, it doesnt mean that they are in an abusive relationship, they could have had a row AND been talking about something upsetting at different times during the meal.
no, it doesnt give any evidence either way, i dont know why he is doing that, my partner will sometimes feel for lumps and bumps on me, he will press quite hard as hes not sure what hes looking for. its her calmness throughout that suggests to me that something else could be going on. people do argue, sometimes loudly, it doesnt mean that they are in an abusive relationship, they could have had a row AND been talking about something upsetting at different times during the meal.
The fact that she is also pictured heading to her car looking extremely upset and distressed certainly implies that her husband was not merely giving her a "friendly medical check-up".
The alternative then is to assume that these pictures are absolute proof that man was throttling, yes *throttling* his wife in a restaurant, in which situation she isn't doing anything about it, both are orderly seated, and no-one is intervening.
This thread shows amply why and how the paps have such an influence on the chronically impressionable.
I have not said he was throttling his wife and I don't think many others have either. But to suggest that because she wasn't throttled and didn't walk away with big black finger impressions around her throat that what Saaatchi did wasn't violent shows a really poor understanding of domestic violence. Domestic violence spans from emotional abuse right through to murder. Surely grabbing someone by the throat in most circumstances is a violent act isn't it? This was done as part of a witnessed heated exchange. Why would he suddenly switch from having a row with her to checking her glands (very badly by squeezing far too hard)?
Yes, Nigella didn't appear to fight him off. That could be because it was nothing. I don't think the pictures show that it was nothing. The fact that she seemed passive could equally be due to fear and the knowledge that resisting would make things much worse for her when she got home.
The fact that she is also pictured heading to her car looking extremely upset and distressed certainly implies that her husband was not merely giving her a "friendly medical check-up".
The fact that she is also pictured heading to her car looking extremely upset and distressed certainly implies that her husband was not merely giving her a "friendly medical check-up".
of course, because the conversation couldnt have been that something might be wrong with her and it upset her, or that she is upset about something else, anything else that might have been discussed that lunchtime?
i would love to see 24/7 photos of your life and read things into it thats not there
I have not said he was throttling his wife and I don't think many others have either. But to suggest that because she wasn't throttled and didn't walk away with big black finger impressions around her throat that what Saaatchi did wasn't violent shows a really poor understanding of domestic violence. Domestic violence spans from emotional abuse right through to murder. Surely grabbing someone by the throat in most circumstances is a violent act isn't it? This was done as part of a witnessed heated exchange. Why would he suddenly switch from having a row with her to checking her glands (very badly by squeezing far too hard)?
Yes, Nigella didn't appear to fight him off. That could be because it was nothing. I don't think the pictures show that it was nothing. The fact that she seemed passive could equally be due to fear and the knowledge that resisting would make things much worse for her when she got home.
you seem to assume that some of us here have no knowledge of DV? I work with victims and perpetrators on a regular basis.
you seem to assume that some of us here have no knowledge of DV? I work with victims and perpetrators on a regular basis.
Ok. Are you suggesting that since there were no bruise marks around Nigella's throat and she apparently never stopped breathing and din't try to fight him off, this cannot have been domestic violence? That appeared to be Welshlad's argument and I disagree with that whole premise and think it shows a lack of appreciation of the spectrum of behaviours which domestic violence covers.
Im not saying domestic abuse isn't happening but those pictures aren't a depiction of it.
It looks like he's feeling her glands, and in the last one he's checking her nose.
She isn't resisting, and both are seated.
If something as violent as throttling is happening I doubt they'd be sat like that.
The story says this:
"Fellow diners and passers-by at Scott’s in Mayfair were shocked to see the *advertising *multimillionaire reduce his celebrity wife to tears.
Saatchi launched a tirade of angry words. Four times he grasped her around the neck with Nigella, 53, looking powerless and petrified.
At first he used only his left hand, then both. At one stage he tweaked her nose then pushed both hands in her face. Twice Nigella jerked her head backwards as if in fear.
Several times she nodded *intently while the conversation became more and more heated.
By the end of the meal she was clearly distraught and in tears."
“It was utterly shocking to watch,” said one onlooker. “I have no doubt she was scared. It was horrific, *really. She was very tearful and was *constantly dabbing her eyes.
“Nigella was very, very upset. She had a real look of fear on her face. No man should do that to a woman. She raised her voice and got angry but at the same time was trying to calm him down, almost like you would try to calm down a child.
"The kiss was a strange thing. He was being *intimidating, *threatening.
“And yet she kissed him. She *appeared to be a woman who loves him but was clearly unable to stop him being abusive, *frightening and *disrespectful to her.”
Unless they were arguing violently about whether she had the flu I can't see his actions as 'checking her glands'.
TBH, getting hold of some one's throat from across a table, isn't an action that would normally happen when having lunch , is it?
She maybe holding his hand to stop him getting both of them around her throat.
From the look on her face, it doesn't appear to be a pleasant encounter.
Ok. Are you suggesting that since there were no bruise marks around Nigella's throat and she apparently never stopped breathing and din't try to fight him off, this cannot have been domestic violence? That appeared to be Welshlad's argument and I disagree with that whole premise and think it shows a lack of appreciation of the spectrum of behaviours which domestic violence covers.
no, I havent said that at all, thats not my argument, I know the full spectrum of behaviours and how the dynamics often work, my point is that these 4, yes only 4 pictures, do not show conclusive evidence of someone being attacked or intimidated or frightened, my first instinct (bearing in mind that I naturally look out for people minimising risks to themselves or others to my job) was not that he was attacking her.
no, I havent said that at all, thats not my argument, I know the full spectrum of behaviours and how the dynamics often work, my point is that these 4, yes only 4 pictures, do not show conclusive evidence of someone being attacked or intimidated or frightened, my first instinct (bearing in mind that I naturally look out for people minimising risks to themselves or others to my job) was not that he was attacking her.
Comments
You've got to be kidding.
As for for checking noses, the best way is to do it yourself. It's called using a mirror.
This apparent incident should definitely be looked into.
http://www.plymouthhospitals.nhs.uk/OURSERVICES/CANCERSERVICES/SKIN/Pages/HowtoCheckYourLymphNodes.aspx
I dont know why this post is accused of trolling, that was my first thought, she is holding hands with him, the fact that his hand is not tensed and she is semi smiling in one of the photos says to me this is not what the media are claiming.
shame on anyone accusing someone of being abusive when they are not
As somebody pointed out, your average pap camera, or any camera for that matter, would likely have a fairly high shutter speed so the pictures we've seen could have literally taken a few seconds in 'real time' so she could still have reacted by trying to grab his hands.
That said, he doesn't have to be throttling her either - grabbing someone by the throat, even of only for a few seconds, is, in itself, a highly threatening gesture and doesn't need to progress into a full on throttling. Her reaction is explainable in one of two ways.
Firstly, as someone pointed out, he could be suffering from dementia and lashing out. Her "passive" reaction could be her way of dealing with the situation and trying to calm him down and pacify him.
Secondly, there could be far more serious abuse going on behind closed doors and her reaction was simply one of fear. Many people often 'freeze' in fear in certain situations and this could well be why she doesn't appear to try and defend herself.
You really think this picture is "not what the media are claiming" ???
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BM1NZG4CEAAAmh9.jpg
PS - Nigella is still beautiful though.
The alternative then is to assume that these pictures are absolute proof that man was throttling, yes *throttling* his wife in a restaurant, in which situation she isn't doing anything about it, both are orderly seated, and no-one is intervening.
This thread shows amply why and how the paps have such an influence on the chronically impressionable.
no, it doesnt give any evidence either way, i dont know why he is doing that, my partner will sometimes feel for lumps and bumps on me, he will press quite hard as hes not sure what hes looking for. its her calmness throughout that suggests to me that something else could be going on. people do argue, sometimes loudly, it doesnt mean that they are in an abusive relationship, they could have had a row AND been talking about something upsetting at different times during the meal.
The fact that she is also pictured heading to her car looking extremely upset and distressed certainly implies that her husband was not merely giving her a "friendly medical check-up".
I have not said he was throttling his wife and I don't think many others have either. But to suggest that because she wasn't throttled and didn't walk away with big black finger impressions around her throat that what Saaatchi did wasn't violent shows a really poor understanding of domestic violence. Domestic violence spans from emotional abuse right through to murder. Surely grabbing someone by the throat in most circumstances is a violent act isn't it? This was done as part of a witnessed heated exchange. Why would he suddenly switch from having a row with her to checking her glands (very badly by squeezing far too hard)?
Yes, Nigella didn't appear to fight him off. That could be because it was nothing. I don't think the pictures show that it was nothing. The fact that she seemed passive could equally be due to fear and the knowledge that resisting would make things much worse for her when she got home.
... or that she was looking / feeling unwell.
of course, because the conversation couldnt have been that something might be wrong with her and it upset her, or that she is upset about something else, anything else that might have been discussed that lunchtime?
i would love to see 24/7 photos of your life and read things into it thats not there
you seem to assume that some of us here have no knowledge of DV? I work with victims and perpetrators on a regular basis.
Ok. Are you suggesting that since there were no bruise marks around Nigella's throat and she apparently never stopped breathing and din't try to fight him off, this cannot have been domestic violence? That appeared to be Welshlad's argument and I disagree with that whole premise and think it shows a lack of appreciation of the spectrum of behaviours which domestic violence covers.
How terrible.
The story says this:
Saatchi launched a tirade of angry words. Four times he grasped her around the neck with Nigella, 53, looking powerless and petrified.
At first he used only his left hand, then both. At one stage he tweaked her nose then pushed both hands in her face. Twice Nigella jerked her head backwards as if in fear.
Several times she nodded *intently while the conversation became more and more heated.
By the end of the meal she was clearly distraught and in tears."
“Nigella was very, very upset. She had a real look of fear on her face. No man should do that to a woman. She raised her voice and got angry but at the same time was trying to calm him down, almost like you would try to calm down a child.
"The kiss was a strange thing. He was being *intimidating, *threatening.
“And yet she kissed him. She *appeared to be a woman who loves him but was clearly unable to stop him being abusive, *frightening and *disrespectful to her.”
Unless they were arguing violently about whether she had the flu I can't see his actions as 'checking her glands'.
She maybe holding his hand to stop him getting both of them around her throat.
From the look on her face, it doesn't appear to be a pleasant encounter.
I did squash a spider once though.
I can't be doing with 'blaming the victim' though, until you've walked in those shoes, you'll never really understand, I suspect.
Or...
You should be ashamed of yourself for jumping to a conclusion based on such flimsy evidence.
And...
I don't think anyone has been 'making excuses' - merely pointing out that how a tabloid rag chooses to spin a story is no indication of its accuracy.
It may be abusive behaviour - but also, it may not be what it's claimed to be.
I don't think she will be leaving him, apparently she kissed him on the cheek afterwards.
He probably attacks her all the time(as he was comfortable to do it in public), she must be used to it.
no, I havent said that at all, thats not my argument, I know the full spectrum of behaviours and how the dynamics often work, my point is that these 4, yes only 4 pictures, do not show conclusive evidence of someone being attacked or intimidated or frightened, my first instinct (bearing in mind that I naturally look out for people minimising risks to themselves or others to my job) was not that he was attacking her.
Exactly right. Maybe The Mirror is trying to win a caption contest.
So what the witnesses say doesn't mean anything?