I am also done after this . If your husbands merits a blue badge then fine . If Natalie merits a blue badge then also fine . Then she should apply for one and if she merits one then display it
Until she does then don't park there

A passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed whether or not there was a badge displayed
Another passing thought:
Has anyone confirmed it to be Natalie's car?

You can only see the back of the car in the photo in the link here also throwing mud at Will Young and I don't know about the other photo but there's nothing to show it's her car in that photo either.

In one of the articles it clearly shows the car side on with her taking stuff out of the boot. So yes, it's her car or she was driving it at least.

Stop trying to defend her. She parked there twice. No excuse for it.

Yes clearly she was driving it so its her responsibilty to park it appropriately . No excuse at all for it . Its pure bad manners at the very least

I jiggered my back badly a few years ago. It was sufficiently bad that I couldn't walk properly for a few weeks and couldn't lift my kids (aged 3 and 2 at the time). So, I'd conclude it was in a far worse state than Nat's if she can still dance. But even when I was at my most crocked, it never occurred to me to use disable parking bays. I just allowed for things taking more time than normal and asked folk (e.g. supermarket staff, workers at the kids' nursery etc.) to do the "heavy lifting" for me. This worked fine, though it was obvious I was quite badly crocked.

So not much sympathy for Nat from me, I'm afraid.

If there are a number of bays marked disabled in a private car park and none or few are in use then it seems quite reasonable for the owner of the car park to allow people to use some, particularly for loading, provided they know there will always be some available for disabled customers.

So what am I supposed to do here - just make the same assumptions that everyone else has that she's a selfish so and so who parked there for three hours like the tabloids said despite the fact she's actually partnered someone with a disability and it seems to run counter to the impression of the nice person I got from elsewhere? That doesn't seem to make sense to me. Also three hours on a rehearsal day for SCD really when she would have had to travelled from elsewhere to make a stay a hotel worthwhile - like seriously guys? That doesn't make sense to me either.

I can believe a hotel allowed someone to use a disabled parking bay to load cases and check in and maybe grab a coffee especially since you can see from the photos that there is actually a free disabled parking bay on the other side of the other parked car. Beyond that no sorry I just can't - decided if you will I've no sympathy for the plight of the disabled if you will but I can't do it especially by what the press have said because they never lie and exaggerate things do they?

Pardon me if I don't think she's the devil incarnate despite the fact that I've never used a disabled parking bay in my life or even considered it.

At the end of the day, if it's a private car park, it's up to the owner of it who is allowed to use it, not the Daily Mail nor anybody else.

It clearly states no parking except for blue badge holders . Thats enough for me to not park there and never will ( unless of course I need a blue badge one day )

I agree with all of this. As for the 'source' saying she was there for three hours etc.. I remember a story the DM ran when Kara and Artem were on the show, with pictures of them (not in the same shot) outside her flat saying a 'source' had seen them having a row and she had been pulling at her hair in anger and shouting across the street at him. Kara later tweeted that the photos had been taken at different times and Artem wasn't even there when she was actually talking to someone completely different and tightening her ponytail rather than pulling at her hair in anger. So, even though the photos show Natalie in a disabled bay I wouldn't necessarily believe the 'source' about anything or completely condemn her without knowing the circumstances, such as who she was with etc.

Except that Natalie hasn't corrected the story despite being questioned about it by a number of disabled people on Twitter.

I don't think she should be hanged drawn and quartered over this, and maybe the discussion should be laid to rest. However, I'm surprised at the convoluted arguments people are coming up with to suggest she did nothing wrong. And to be honest, that's what is keeping this thread going.

I get that, but I'm not someone who thinks everything is true unless it's denied on social media either. A lot of people were prepared to give Will the benefit of the doubt even though he didn't explain why he left the show on Twitter etc.

I'm not trying to suggest she did nothing wrong, but I guess I just don't view it as black and white as some on here. Although I haven't ever parked in a disabled bay, to me it isn't as bad to stop in one in a private car park for a few minutes to unload bags, with the permission of the hotel, when there are other disabled bays free, than it would be to park in one in a supermarket for hours while you go off and do your shopping. I don't know which end of that spectrum Natalie falls under as I don't know the circumstances, but I can equally understand why other people view it as completely unacceptable however long she was there.

Eight pages

Just this

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....4,203,200_.jpg

People are often advised not to respond to things like this in the tabloids because every question answered will lead to another question and they have no guarantee that their answer will be quoted accurately.

With the preponderance of cameras now in phones, windscreens, CCTV etc it is becoming common for images to be sold to the tabloids and calls for the police to prosecute people when there is actually nothing that could be used in court.

I normally park just at the end of one of the disabled parking areas in my local supermarket. There are frequently (nearly always) vehicles without disabled badges parked in them, often vans motorhomes, and pickups, I have quick look at the windscreen as I walk past. The supermarket don't take any action of course, the law in Scotland is supposed to be changing but I can't imagine the police taking any interest.

I can't help but feel that if there were a simple explanation as posters are suggesting, Natalie would have put it on twitter. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain. I comment as one whose 90 year old dad has a blue badge and cannot get out without it. If he can't find a disabled space, he has to go home.

there could be a variety of reasons why not. Implicating the hotel and also she might have to think very carefully about what she does say here. Also it would depend on the tone of the question being asked - it's difficult to reply to 'how could you?' however justified that question is.

In the Godforsaken country that used to be called England, but nowadays is known as Beyond The Pale, would it not be a good idea for supermarkets and shops to have 2-minute loading-unloading bays at the front of their shops like they have in civilised countries?

In recent years, whenever back in the UK with a car, I look with despair at all the yellow paint that has been dribbled onto tarmac road surfaces and wonder why the Tate Modern has not seized on this as a new art form. I'm surprised drivers are even allowed to get our of their cars at petrol stations to refuel.