Have to say, l am disappointed in the whole affair The only thing that puzzles me is why CP didn't go to court as a witness, being as it was supposedly her that NH threatened to kill, and her relationship that was at the core of it.....why send Andre :confused

It's a tacky, sordid little affair in which no one looks good.

I suppose PA was selected for the task as she needed someone too stupid to understand why lying in court is wrong, too vain to believe he'd get caught, and too publicity-hungry to allow his media machine to grind to a halt. That, of course, is merely my opinion

Perhaps the brief felt she would be an even more unreliable witness. Or, more likely, they were worried about other things that might have been asked if she was on the stand.

It was a very odd decision, wasn't it? Getting PA to be a witness, knowing he was going to be lying under oath, and knowing then that you were going to get press saying he'd been lying under oath? As it happens, the judges summation was much worse, with PA being called unreliable, prone to exaggeration, obsessed with being seen as the good guy and a liar, all of which the press* has now seized on gleefully. So CAN have tarnished the name of their biggest client at a time when he was getting his most mainstream opportunity and attention. Had CP been the main witness, perhaps that could have been averted, or at least minimised.

*I can't understand why, knowing this court case was ongoing, TPTB decided this was the year to have PA on the show. It was pretty obvious that he wasn't going to come out of it all good, and they should have realised that whatever the verdict, it was always going to end with "Strictly Come Dancing star PA...". They may not have expected him to be eviscerated by the judge, who had nothing good to say about him, but it should have been the worst-case scenario for them in PR terms.

Indeed. Puzzling

So if Claire Powell is as ruthless as portrayed, and Peter Andre, her not too bright puppet, has he deliberately been thrown under the bus? A lot of his testimony sounds more confusion and not having been kept fully informed, rather than lying. Also, I fully believe most people would have been in fear of some of those tweets. Whilst they were actually reading them on a daily basis, for weeks on end, the recipients wouldn't have been in a frame of mind to dissect them, the way the judge did. Fear is immediate. You either feel it or you don't and I still think it was wrong for it to be belittled by the judge.

Of course none of that will matter to those who have gleefully waited for years to bring Peter Andre down. I find it all sad and sordid, but to see the downright hatred spewed by some people is quite horrible.

I have been reading the 85 page judgement and it would seem ITV 2 who were the respondents in this claim chose not to seek her testimony. Seemingly she was felt to fall into the category of a hostile witness. i.e. one not likely to provide a witness statement in the best interests of defending the claim.

Maybe she was felt to be too emotionally charged to give a dispassionate witness statement. Interestingly this seems to be what the judge is saying about Andre's testimony too. i.e. motivated from loyalty rather than reason.

I think the Judges main point about being feared of the tweets was that surely if you were concerned there was a concerted death threat campaign against you by a known person then you would tell the people who could do something about it - like the Police or your own legal team. How can you be afraid for your life and not do anything about it?

The problem could be that he actually thinks his OK headline life is the same as a real life. Real people don't run to the press about every little or big thing in their life, real people fix problems.

Pa lives in a world of superlatives and hyperbole and is probably now wondering why the judge didn't fall for the same extravagant emotions and economies of truth that have got him where he was last week.

the whole immersion in what by any standards is a pretty obscure case is completely bizarre. it hasn't come about as a result of peter andre's being on strictly, particularly as people seem to know the ins and outs of every aspect of the case, and the events around it, and the people involved as if they were friends or family....

that suggests to me people are coming here with long knowledge and dislike of peter andre... i know there are/have been long running threads in showbiz about him and his ex wife, and i know there are people who seem to devote a large part of their life to following the every move of these people just to let us all know how 'discusted' by it all they are.

although i did snigger at the headlines, i couldn't personally be bothered to read the actual judgement, and i've never heard of any of the people involved. i can't see that most people would unless they are regularly consuming the sort of media in which these people are circulating - low rent gossip magazines and trash TV.

take a tip from me - if you can't stand the man, he's easy to avoid. but if you lie down with dogs, you will get fleas, and people might struggle to tell the difference.

Not quite that innocent. It was PA who told ITV he had decided not to honour his contract with ITV and Hendriks because of a 'falling out' with him. He told them he no longer wanted to work with him. PA put both ITV and Hendriks in a very awkward situation by reneging in everything that had been agreed and having a tantrum. ITV reneged on the contract, dumped Hendriks and found themselves caught in a legal wrangle. They lost and it will cost them. PA is not guilt free. He lit the match.

Peter Andre is a 40 year old man, not a special needs child. He has been in the entertainment industry for the vast majority of that time. He is not Claire's puppet, he was informed throughout the process via email and at meetings. He chose to go into court and tell the judge things that were blantently untrue.

Itv obviously felt he would be honest and he obviously thought he would get away with not being.

As for laughing at his downfall, this man was complicate in trying to ruin NK - to the point of being willing to lie in court about it. He was also the main income for a woman who cheerfully threw kk under the bus, because kk had the gall to not approve of cp's affair.

All those rankings of kp about pa and c@can are starting to look so much more beleivable, and both pa and c@can have had their credibility shot to pieces.

Oh, thanks for that information .

Sound advice. Very easy to avoid you'd think. But bizarrely some find it "entertaining" to dissect every aspect of the trials (pardon the pun) and tribulations in his life. They're dedicated it has to be said.......reading full court transcripts. Jesus.

I think they will be disappointed though. His demise will not be happening any time soon.......

Some actually want to find out the truth because they are curious, have intelligence and innate curiosity and would prefer to know the facts before they mouth off and support a so called 'star' who has a very tenuous grasp of the what it is to be honest.

It's so much easier and lazier to not bother to read the facts and then have a tantrum about others who do the research.

Besides law is so complicated for some, isn't it? All that reading. Those facts and figures. Lordy!

Far, far better for them to play dumb, ignore the facts and then climb onto a pedestal from where they can blithely claim that they are above it all and don't care anyway.

Ignorance is such bliss! For some.

Personally what I find far more sordid is both him & CP went out of their way to ruin a man while PA went under the guise of poor little me for years & years.

Excellent post. well said!

Sounds like you think NH is a poor little undertrod victim in all this .

well if you come across any, send them along to the thread. it will make a nice change from the usual suspects parading their neuroses like badges of honour.

NH not only lost out financially, his partner cheated on him, he struggled for access to see his son, malicious lies were made up about him so if he's not the victim, can you tell me who is? Because from where I'm standing it's certainly not PA or CP.

[QUOTE=sofakat;79949320]Some actually want to find out the truth because they are curious, have intelligence and innate curiosity and would prefer to know the facts before they mouth off and support a so called 'star' who has a very tenuous grasp of the what it is to be honest.

It's so much easier and lazier to not bother to read the facts and then have a tantrum about others who do the research.

Besides law is so complicated for some, isn't it? All that reading. Those facts and figures. Lordy!

Far, far better for them to play dumb, ignore the facts and then climb onto a pedestal from where they can blithely claim that they are above it all and don't care anyway.

Ignorance is such bliss! For some.[/quote]

I have all the intelligence and curiosity I need.....as do others I'm sure.......plus the ability to read any amount of legal jargon, and arrive at a considered opinion.....my opinion.

What I will not do is be patronised....again!......by someone who is also just expressing an opinion, whilst dismissing those of others not in agreement.

Dear me. How the Sainted have fallen. Imagine the utter shame of being publicly eviscerated by a Judge in this manner. It couldn't have happened to a worthier person

I hope PA and Janette are using Sweet Little Lies as their music this evening.

Yes, that's it isn't it?
He lives in a world where a splinter in the finger turns into an 'emergency dash to Hospital', the slightest criticism turns into 'vitriol spouted by jellus hatah's', are surrounded by employees paid to keep them sweet which means agreeing with whatever they say and can have a column in a magazine which contradicts itself on a weekly basis but it's all fine because in the general scheme of things it's not important.

He's had to step out of Scripted Reality Life into Real Life and it's bit him on the bum.

Unless you have got 'insider' information, don't know how you can say that.

Pretty much this. He's far from alone in this as I think there are too many reality tv 'stars' these days who are so far removed from planet earth, it's not funny.
Every bowel movement is controlled by their management team and they can't buy a coffee without (a) asking permission (b) calling the personal pap and (c) making sure the DM SOS has first refusal on the photos.
Problem now for PA is he took this unreal world he lives in into a witness box and that's where he crossed the line from talking crap to lying under oath.

Maybe it's a lesson to learn that PR, spin and meaningless awards for bugger all don't mean diddly squat outside of the rags and that judges can't be charmed with a nod and a wink and puppy dog eyes - they can spot insincerity oozing out of every pore far better than the queue in a shopping mall buying cheap perfume