ChatterBank3 mins ago
Nigella's Assistant's Found Not Guilty
This is just breaking on BBC News - can't find it online.
http:// www.tel egraph. co.uk/n ews/ukn ews/cri me/1052 6973/Do -you-be lieve-N igella- Lawson- approve d-spend ing-whe n-off-h er-head -jury-a sked.ht ml
I'm still on Team Nigella, and feel that this trial has all been about her, rather that the actual accused.
http://
I'm still on Team Nigella, and feel that this trial has all been about her, rather that the actual accused.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.it's the new trout pout that makes them swoon, Canary.
Actually.... I think that's new; it lookes as though she celebrated her divorce with some Botox.
I can't help wondering if it made the jury think she was a bit fake? She looks - in recent photos - rather different from the cuddly cook on our TVs.
Actually.... I think that's new; it lookes as though she celebrated her divorce with some Botox.
I can't help wondering if it made the jury think she was a bit fake? She looks - in recent photos - rather different from the cuddly cook on our TVs.
Can't say that I'm surprised. It's a bit difficult to say that you are being dishonest if you receive gifts but you think the gifts are being given because the donor has a guilty secret, though, in fact, you would never tell anyone of it anyway. That is really the line that the defence took. Some reports suggested that the women were using the threat of publicity as a weapon so that Nigella Lawson didn't report theft ,or ostensibly consented to the taking when that consent was not true consent, not freely given. If the jury thought that, then the defence would fail.
What the prosecution appeared to be ignoring was the question line "How much was your salary?" "Were you happy with that?" "It was not £170,000 a year for the two of you was it, £85,000 each p.a.?" " So there's a big difference in what you were earning and what you were taking, wasn't there?" "So for what reason, do you think, did Nigella Lawson decide that your salary ought to be £85k more than it was?"
What the prosecution appeared to be ignoring was the question line "How much was your salary?" "Were you happy with that?" "It was not £170,000 a year for the two of you was it, £85,000 each p.a.?" " So there's a big difference in what you were earning and what you were taking, wasn't there?" "So for what reason, do you think, did Nigella Lawson decide that your salary ought to be £85k more than it was?"
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.