Your post suggested that BOTS shouldn't have her back,
so in context of the conversation I thought you meant regards her behaviour ?
no matter if you didn't, but it read like that., we are agreeing though !
you're not out for an argument today are you Veri, i haven't been to the gym yet !

It's indefensible for Aisleyne which is why the case against her has not ended.

all of them really - but I'd referred to Farrah as I was discussing Farrah's behaviour and talking about the incident now she's received a caution, so that's why I mentioned her specifically.

Wonder if Aishleyne did anything after the show was cut , that's what i'd like to know, Farrah said she'd assaulted her 'twice' from her side of the story !

Aish hasn't received a caution for throwing liquid has she
Perhaps she was verbally threatening , I could believe that

but then Farrah threatened to kill everyone in the house, when in the Diary Room, and she didn't get a caution, so be interesting what transpires now , but can't see any actiion being taken against Aishleyne,

unless of course it's connected to her twitter threats against Farrah before they appeared on the show, and there is legal action that can be taken out against threatening tweets now - interesting, as Aishleyne's since removed those tweets hasn't she ! all will be revealed no doubt.

Sorry I don't agree. The 2 main parties (ais and the production) who are still under investigation are appropriate. Aisleyne's act was premeditated and that is well documented. She made the move from angry words to aggressive actions. The producers were well aware of her threats, they had already had to remove Ais from a BOTS panel during a show before and her drinking to excess is also well documented. It's why the case involving her and the producers is not closed.

It is correct that people in the UK have been prosecuted for twitter threats. In this particular case she issued threats and also ACTED on those threats. Taking it to another level. I still maintain the party most responsible is the production. They hired the unstable Aisleyne, they knew about her "twitter threats" and they knew she was prone to lose control when drinking.

Did you take Farrah's little girl tantrum over the flip flops seriously?

PS Vicky said she had to "Stop" Aisleyne which indicates to me that Ais did attempt to actually get to Farrah and had to be "stopped" from doing so.

She was removed for saying C***. It was a bit of a moment on BOTS but I've heard far worse in the house.

ranting about a HM on Twitter , doesn't prove premeditation, unless she specifically said she couldn't wait to throw a glass/something at Farrah and made an 'actual' threat that falls into a legal remit, - someone may know EXACTLY what Aishleyne said in her tweets, which have since been removed , -

I know it does sound like Aishleyne was going into that studio with intent on verbally attacking Farrah as she's removed her tweets ,but it is BOTs and panel members frequently will vent their views on their twitter about HMs before going onto the show as a guest,- but were they actual 'threats' and not just bitchy mud-slinging comments?

Either way I agree, the show knew putting Aishleyne on that panel it was going to be lively, and Vicky clearly didn't like Farrah either. but a lot of their panel members are prone to outbursts, so that's not a reason to take legal action against Endemol , and I thought Farrahs allegations against Aishleyne are the only outstanding investigations going on now ?

I think there was some irresponsible stirring from Rylan's questioning, didn't he ask the panel "Do you miss Farrah being in the house?" and the tension and insults just escalated from that as the Panel members were scathing about her in response and she reacted to the Panel's comments ,

not sure that could lead to any kind of legal action though , it was irresponsible to give Rylan such questions to ask the Panel,, but that's nature of BOTS every week isn't it.

Nicola Maclean's response to Aishleyne's appearance on Bots was:

Nicola McLean ‏@NicolaMcLean Sep 22
Killing it @Aisleyne1 she is amazing! Handled that nasty bit of work better than me you go girl

this tweet is still there !

Aisleyne Horgan-Wallace facing criminal charges over CBBBOTS brawl as Farrah Abraham and Janice Dickinson CAUTIONED for common assault


While police revealed earlier today that Farrah Abraham and Janice Dickinson have been cautioned for common assault following the fracas, the incident between Aisleyne and Farrah is still being investigated.
Enquiries in connection with another assault allegation continue, therefore it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/aisleyne-horgan-wallace-facing-criminal-6531365#rlabs=1%20rt$category%20p$2

Criminal charges ?
We don't have full story on what Aishleyne said or did , either before or after they cut the show, so that's interesting. It's the mirror though...........so still juries out as they say

Who said it hit the wall ? all the reports I've read say it hit Vicky .

Two parties have to sign a non-disclosure agreement, so why would Channel 5 do that? It would just make their lives more complicated with endless interference from agents and others....

There are no non-disclosure agreements. You either sign up on Channel 5's terms, or Channel 5 get someone else....

Signing a non-disclosure agreement on a reality TV show is an oxymoron if ever I saw one. The point of Reality TV is full-disclosure.

Nobody can ban legally obtained footage from being broadcast, especially footage that doesn't break any Ofcom rules, or legal laws.

Farah and anyone else can politely ask for it not to be shown, but that is all.

And for the record....nobody is going to sue anyone else either. It's too expensive and the outcome is too random. There's no Jury and the final judgement is by a single judge according to the balance of probabilities (as opposed to 'beyond reasonable doubt').

Think back to Andrew Mitchell. There is not one shred of physical evidence that Andrew Mitchell said 'f****** plebs' (That is what made Mitchell so confident of a win), and yet a judge said that on balance he probably did say those words....and that was both his reputation and half a million quid down the swanny river.

Does Farah or Janice really want to put their lives on hold for a year whilst they risk every penny they own to sue this person or that person....just to win an argument when they could be back on a reality TV show back in America?

No. Once the Police work is done, Channel 5 will be free to do what they want, and neither Janice or Farah will give a hoot.

True, Aisleyne has a column for the mirror.

Enquiries in connection with another assault allegation continue, therefore it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time."

This is a quote from the police spokeswomen.

Well ..............it might be me but the words 'assault allegation' smacks to me of Farrah's desperation. Surely if it could be proven by the footage she would have been charged or cautioned. Sounds like Farrah's team is working hard to make that one stick.

Just my opinion.

Wouldn't the other assault still continuing be the one from Vikki.

)wouldnt surprise me if somehow in future, after dust has settled, they do a farrah and aisleyne reunion, but this time, they bond over "being 2 strong independant bitches who take no sh1t" and get on like a house on fire,and are the new jarrah!, and probably invited back in cbb as a duo..you heard it here first!

what was that?


.

I'm not surprised Jules, they are from the same cloth it seems. That's Helen and Farrah by the way.

doesn't mean there's any foundation to it yet though, just investigating still going on, arguing between parties legal reps no doubt. That shouldn't take long given how quickly the rest concluded.

like nicola mclean and aisleyne...have you seen the tweet going around where nicola is congratulating aisleyne after throwing the drink, and all the fracas, vicky hurt etc, .....well done girl ?..both from the same cloth

To be fair I would say that out of the 4 of them Farrah is the worse because none of the other 3 have thrown glasses at anyone.

Well, there's not been full disclosure has there, as they cut the show and didn't air it - that's why they have a timelapse.

Why wouldn't Endemol agree to sign a non-disclosure ? and no it wouldn't make their lives more complicated, they'd want it done and dusted too, and I bet you they'd cooperate.

The footage's already been used during the investigations, they're not going to do anything with it, they're not going to air the brawl , so it will just be archived won't it. I'm sure they'll fully co-operate with the legal reps of those who've been cautioned, why wouldn't they ?

Of course there are non-disclosure agreements. This was an incident that's involved lawyers, police and an investigation , not quite the same as signing up for BB, and having a choice as to what's aired is it. Those involved will want this put to bed and fast, and ensure legal writs are in place to prevent the footage being put online/sold/aired, anyone in their right mind would ensure their legal teams closed that door.

it wasnt asking you that, ...you mention those 2 were cut from the same cloth, and i said so were they, of course youd say farrah is the worst.

I think it's disgusting Farrah has retweeted that offensive tweet about Emma and only goes to show she is out to get CBB feeling hard done by. Not an ounce of respect for that woman Farrah.

There'd have to be a helluva lot of thrown glasses to be considered as foul as those two!

Do you honestly think that Farrah will want to appear in the UK again after this.

Farrah is by far the worst out of Helen and Aisylene. Helen tries to rationalise (a little) in her columns albeit misguided rationalising. Aisylene will hold her hands up if pushed or recognises she's messed up. There is some empathy and understanding with Aisylene. Farrah on the other hand is just in it for herself. Simple. Any sense of apology that has come from articles has been followed by an excuse or an attempt to prove others wronged her.