Peaches Geldof dead (Merged)

1717273747577»

Comments

  • cressida100cressida100 Posts: 3,841
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bela wrote: »
    It seems that Peaches being dead just isn't enough of a punishment for some people. That the need to hammer home how awful and irresponsible she was takes precedence over the feelings of those left behind is truly awful.
    .



    So very true. Well said.
  • BelaBela Posts: 2,568
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jo March wrote: »
    I beg your pardon - an apology is in order for that !

    Sorry, just read that back. I thought when I responded that you were suggesting that Fifi should avoid the internet so those who want to hound Peaches could do so with a clear conscience, rather than just meaning it would be less upsetting for Fifi.

    My apologies. :)
  • Jo MarchJo March Posts: 9,256
    Forum Member
    Bela wrote: »
    Sorry, just read that back. I thought when I responded that you were suggesting that Fifi should avoid the internet so those who want to hound Peaches could do so with a clear conscience, rather than just meaning it would be less upsetting for Fifi.

    My apologies. :)
    Apologies accepted - thank you, Bela. :)
  • wilehelmaswilehelmas Posts: 3,610
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bela wrote: »
    Well, yes, I suppose, objectively, she should, but equally, I suppose, she's grieving over the loss of her dead sister and finding it hard to cope with random, uninformed, judgemental opinion on the internet from random people who don't know the first thing about what Peaches might have gone through, or what Fifi and the rest of the family did/tried to do for her.

    It seems that Peaches being dead just isn't enough of a punishment for some people. That the need to hammer home how awful and irresponsible she was takes precedence over the feelings of those left behind is truly awful.

    Not aimed at you specifically, just a general comment.

    Well let's keep it in perspective. People can say what they want about Fifi but, yes, she really doesn't have to wind herself up by going onto the internet. She's not going to be able to stem the huge flow of opinion on such an event and that's that. People will call it as they see it, whatever their view. Either fight and begin to look a berk or step away, her choice. It makes no odds to me.

    If Phaedra or the other little lad with the wacky name had hurt himself on paraphernalia or swallowed heroin by accident would we be in a differerent frame of mind I wonder? Because that would have been a headline and a half too.

    I'm sorry she got herself in a situation like that but here is only one thing and one thing only I give two hoots about here and that is that babies were put in danger in a family home by an adult parent. That is the bottom line. You can skirt round it all you like but I and other people take a very dim view. The difference is I am not trolling anyone on the internets over it. I keep my view here and that's it.
  • BelaBela Posts: 2,568
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    wilehelmas wrote: »
    If Phaedra or the other little lad with the wacky name had hurt himself on paraphernalia or swallowed heroin by accident would we be in a differerent frame of mind I wonder? Because that would have been a headline and a half too.

    Not me. Thank god they came to no harm and of course it would have been horrendous had that happened, but I would still not be condemning an addict for behaving like an addict since it's pointless.
    I'm sorry she got herself in a situation like that but here is only one thing and one thing only I give two hoots about here and that is that babies were put in danger in a family home by an adult parent. That is the bottom line. You can skirt round it all you like but I and other people take a very dim view. The difference is I am not trolling anyone on the internets over it. I keep my view here and that's it.

    I'm not skirting around anything. I'm merely pointing out that the reality of addiction is a grim and ugly one that makes people behave in a selfish and irresponsible and compulsive and erratic and unpredictable way. The behaviour is totally up for condemnation but the behaviour is a product of the compulsion and the addict has little to no control over that. None of us here have any idea what battles Peaches fought with it, or how much of a toll it took on, or how hard she tried to beat it (although from her ex-nanny's words, a woman who knew her very well, it seems she did try hard), so no, on that basis, I can't condemn her despite the potential danger she may have put her children in. I just find it desperately sad, for all concerned, as I do for anyone battling addiction.

    If other people want to take a dim view of it, fine. I can see why they would because of the children. But taking a dim view of it completely ignores the reality of addiction and the control it can have - despite an individual's best efforts to overcome it - over people's lives.
  • impartialobservimpartialobserv Posts: 1,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Peaches' sisters seemed to have coped with their difficult childhoods much better. Fifi was less affected by virtue of being older - and away at boarding school when Paula Yates went off the rails. Pixie, on the other hand, was younger, so perhaps less aware. Peaches, however - the cleverest and most sensitive of them all - was at the coal face. This sad photo seems to sum the dynamic up, somehow.

    Judging Peaches now is both cruel - and futile.
  • Blockz99Blockz99 Posts: 5,045
    Forum Member
    Cressida wrote: »
    It’s too late to question why Peaches did what she did. She certainly made a fatal mistake but we knew she’d paid the ultimate price and knew it months ago. It’s her bereaved husband who is the one who is left to ponder on the what ifs or maybes or perhaps he should put himself on the rack as some appear to want him to do.

    Silly girl, unhappy girl, selfish girl or just a girl who was in the public eye but what does it matter when it’s her husband who is the one who has to get on with it and make a happy life for their kids. Being in the know or raking it over and condemning Peaches doesn’t make it any easier for anyone in her family. It’s not us who have lost their loved one but her family who must live on without her and take any flack directed at Peaches.

    None of them have nothing to reproach themselves for so hopefully they’re all strong enough to survive this current round of criticism.



    Her entire family should pat themselves on the back for allowing a junkie to be in charge of two young children .
  • The PrumeisterThe Prumeister Posts: 22,398
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Peaches' sisters seemed to have coped with their difficult childhoods much better. Fifi was less affected by virtue of being older - and away at boarding school when Paula Yates went off the rails. Pixie, on the other hand, was younger, so perhaps less aware. Peaches, however - the cleverest and most sensitive of them all - was at the coal face. This sad photo seems to sum the dynamic up, somehow.

    Judging Peaches now is both cruel - and futile.



    Spot on.

    Yes, her child could have come to serious harm - or worse still, died. But he didn't and she did. Her addiction killed her. Thank God her baby was safe.
  • CressidaCressida Posts: 3,218
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Blockz99 wrote: »
    [/B]


    Her entire family should pat themselves on the back for allowing a junkie to be in charge of two young children .

    Her babies are well and safe and being looked after by their relatives which attests to both families commitment to their grandchildren and nephews. Peaches death came like a bolt out of the blue for everyone so what makes you believe all her family were aware that Peaches was struggling or was remotely in need of their help?

    Her family and her husband's family are still grieving and coming to term with what's happened whilst outsiders look in and decide who they'll blame. Judgemental people post but I'm certainly not shocked that they do.
  • Irma BuntIrma Bunt Posts: 1,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Blockz99 wrote: »
    [/B]


    Her entire family should pat themselves on the back for allowing a junkie to be in charge of two young children .

    Quite. And I'm afraid I find it hard to muster much sympathy for another dead junkie. If you take drugs, you know the risks. And if you take drugs - and those risks - with a kid in the house you deserve contempt.
  • Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's sad how some people get off on flogging the dead.
  • MicrokorgMicrokorg Posts: 2,670
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How much do they sell for??
  • sweetpeanutsweetpeanut Posts: 4,805
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jol44 wrote: »
    It's sad how some people get off on flogging the dead.

    Very sad.
  • Elle_JamesElle_James Posts: 855
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The baby caught up in this tragedy may well have come to no physical harm. However, the emotional distress he must have suffered, left completely alone throughout an entire night and half of the next day, is quite another matter. Only time will tell how that may have affected him.

    Thomas Cohen told the court hearing last week that Peaches started using heroin again in February. That she had a stash hidden in the loft which he actually witnessed her flushing down the toilet in April. Was that knowledge not shared with family members in order to help Peaches? And knowing this, surely it was totally irresponsible leaving her alone with their child.
  • Blue Eyed ladyBlue Eyed lady Posts: 6,007
    Forum Member
    Elle_James wrote: »
    The baby caught up in this tragedy may well have come to no physical harm. However, the emotional distress he must have suffered, left completely alone throughout an entire night and half of the next day, is quite another matter. Only time will tell how that may have affected him.

    Thomas Cohen told the court hearing last week that Peaches started using heroin again in February. That she had a stash hidden in the loft which he actually witnessed her flushing down the toilet in April. Was that knowledge not shared with family members in order to help Peaches? And knowing this, surely it was totally irresponsible leaving her alone with their child.

    I'm not sure which baby was left with Peaches, either way he was under 2 years old, I'm no expert but I think it highly unlikely he'll even remember being left far less suffer effects.
    Everyone (not just you) can go on about the "what if's" etc. Are they relevant? I think what is more important is, thank God her child came to no harm, tragically Peaches did & paid for her addiction with her life.
    All the details of flushing heroin down the loo are irrelevant, as for who knew what, who did what to help with regards to the Geldof family, nobody apart from the family knows this, therefore I feel it's very harsh (again not just you) for some FMs to pass judgement on the family when they don't know the facts.
  • cressida100cressida100 Posts: 3,841
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    therefore I feel it's very harsh (again not just you) for some FMs to pass judgement on the family when they don't know the facts.

    If I were you I wouldn't waste your time with reasonable comments as this thread is full of people gleefully giving their 'what if's'. :(
  • Blue Eyed ladyBlue Eyed lady Posts: 6,007
    Forum Member
    If I were you I wouldn't waste your time with reasonable comments as this thread is full of people gleefully giving their 'what if's'. :(

    Every time I post on this thread, I tell myself it'll be the last time as the lack of compassion astounds me & leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth but for some reason I'm drawn back & to be fair, there are many posters who aren't interested in the "what if's" and can see Peaches death for what it was, a bloody tragedy.
  • shelleyj89shelleyj89 Posts: 16,292
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The guy is also part of the music industry and so I'd be surprised if he hasn't taken drugs himself or mixed with others who have, other than Peaches. He probably isn't as innocent as what some people want to think.

    All assumption, unless you know something we don't? My guess is you don't.
    Tom isn't your typical "rock star type" though. He isn't Axl Rose. I don't doubt he probably has mixed with other people who take drugs, no-one has said he's "innocent" but he seems a very intelligent man who was well-brought up who I believe will do his best to bring his boys up in the same way.

    Spot on.
    I also really hope her "rock star" husband gets his priorities sorted, it seems like virtually all of her boyfriends were only famous for being with her, from that Towers Of London bloke to this fellow.

    Do you know him? Tom doesn't seek the celebrity lifestyle. He is a very quiet, unassuming person. I wouldn't even call him famous. His priorities are his boys.
Sign In or Register to comment.