Of course it's not an exact science, many years ago Mrs Jer directed me to become involved in such a situation and they both turned on me. Having followed my SIL's chequered history with men, it was with much confidence, I threatened one of her husbands, and he was of ski after she turned up on our doorstep with a broken nose, and in hysterics. I operated on the basis that if they beat women up then they are cowards, although that is in itself a dangerous non exact science.

Kaffy, that's what I was saying. He is a nasty peice of work and im certain he will have made hr feel its all her fault when the story broke.

As for all those saying they don't know why people stay....... They aren't 'mad' they are fragile and scared. It takes great courage and strength to get out if a relationship that's turned violent/abusive.

 

 

sems he makes an habit of it... this was taken a few months ago,

 

 

and reports she's left the marital home, although this is the Daily Mail. 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...Charles-Saatchi.html

 

 

TW*T  

 

 

Police are supposedly investigating the incident 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...d-at-restaurant.html

If he's like that in public it makes you wonder what he's like in the privacy of their home. She should press charges. Why would she need a man that treats her like that. She's a successful woman who can earn her own income, if she stays because she loves him it's a toxic relationship. No one should be treated like that, women or men.

 

totally agree Yellow Rose, you don't have to have two brain cells to see by his actions he is a total control freak. I hope now its out in the open she can be convinced by family and friends to leave it way behind her 

Horrid story, and I hope it's true that she has now left.

 

However, I do know that if I had been there and seen it happen there is no way that I would have intervened. I would like to think that I would, but I know I wouldn't.

 

I've actually given this a lot of thought all day, and have come to the conclusion that the person who took the pictures and gave (or probably sold) them to the papers did her much more good than intervening and having to take abuse from him and apologies from her.

 

What a mess, eh?

 

 

I agree with you Rexi, in this case I think the pap did her a massive favour. Maybe seeing it in the cold light of day will spur her to leave him for good. I always though him an arrogant toss pot...first instincts seem to have been proven right. 

I've thought about this.

Her bro is a journo - perhaps the violence has been going on for some time now and they're using the best means of attack?  It's proof - and she'd need proof against someone of his status (he's loaded after all).  No way can he twist it and ruin her reputation in a messy divorce case.

Yep - there should be zero tolerance here and shaming someone may just stop it.

On R2 shortly.

Art collector Charles Saatchi says images of him grasping his wife, celebrity chef Nigella Lawson, by the neck show "a playful tiff".

The photos in the Sunday People were taken about a week ago outside a restaurant in Mayfair, central London.

"The pictures are horrific but give a far more drastic and violent impression of what took place," he reportedly told London's Evening Standard.

Ms Lawson has not commented. Police say they are examining the images.

Officers from the Community Safety Unit at Westminster said they were aware of the article and were making inquiries to see if further investigation is necessary. No complaint has been received.

In Monday's Evening Standard, Mr Saatchi said: "About a week ago, we were sitting outside a restaurant having an intense debate about the children, and I held Nigella's neck repeatedly while attempting to emphasise my point.

"There was no grip, it was a playful tiff.

"Nigella's tears were because we both hate arguing, not because she had been hurt.

"We had made up by the time we were home. The paparazzi were congregated outside our house after the story broke yesterday morning, so I told Nigella to take the kids off till the dust settled."

Ms Lawson and Mr Saatchi, a former advertising executive, have been married since 2003. She has two children, Cosima and Bruno, from her marriage to journalist John Diamond, who died in 2001.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22935683

 

 

 yeah like we all believe you Charles .... 

 

 

That's why I said they should have given the photos to Nigella and let her dowhat she wants with them.  Having some one humiliate you like that all the while some pap is standing there snapping away rubbing his greasy paws together is not in her best interests.  If the paper really gave a crap, they should have handed the photos to her not splashed her all over the papers.

 

It's all guess work, no one knows what's really going on or who feels what.  If it's proof the paper were interested in providing, provide it to Nigella, not the public.  If she wants them published then by all means let her do it, but don't take that decision out of her hands all to earn a bit of cash by selling them to a paper. 

 

Yes, it is all guesswork - and it also occurred to me if her brother was a journo that it might be a family intervention... you can deny what goes on behind closed doors, you can't deny what happens in public.

Just seen this on twitter

 

Nick Griffin MEP ‏@nickgriffinmep <small class="time">1h</small>

If I had the opportunity to squeeze Nigella Lawson, her throat wouldn't be my first choice.

 

What a horrible man!!

I don;t think its all "guesswork" as people are suggesting.

From eyewitness accounts he was angry and she was trying to pacify him.

The pictures of her crying afterwards say it all.

Disgusting man!!

He told the Evening Standard: "About a week ago, we were sitting outside a restaurant having an intense debate about the children, and I held Nigella's neck repeatedly while attempting to emphasise my point.
"There was no grip, it was a playful tiff. The pictures are horrific but give a far more drastic and violent impression of what took place.
"Nigella's tears were because we both hate arguing, not because she had been hurt. We had made up by the time we were home."
Explaining why Nigella was then pictured leaving their family home with a suitcase and her 17-year-old son, Charles claims it was merely to avoid attention from the paparazzi.

"I have no doubt she was scared,” the onlooker told The Sunday People. “It was horrific, really. She was very tearful and was constantly dabbing her eyes. Nigella was very, very upset.”

 

The witness said: “She raised her voice and got angry but at the same time was trying to calm him down, almost like you would try to calm down a child. The kiss was a strange thing. He was being intimidating, threatening.”

So it was all playful was it?  Nigella playfully looked upset during that incident, she playfully walked out of the restaurant crying.

when my Mom died Nigella sent me DM's saying nice stuff & how she coped about her Ma - if i was there when her greasy ol' man did that, i'd be in the blue brick now

Aww that's just lovely

I know poor Nigella .... Charles can say what he likes ... We are not stupid.

This very public 'outing' is just what abusers deserve.

It appears that we don't need to guess any more.

Other photos of his abusive ways have been hauled out of the archives.

 

I wonder, if the latest press write up had been more about his reactions, his face and not primarily about hers...would we be more accepting of the photos being published?  The culprit caught red handed rather than the victim being humilated?

Advertising guru Charles Saatchi has been cautioned by police for assaulting his wife Nigella Lawson at a restaurant.

The 70-year-old voluntarily attended a central London police station and accepted the caution after photographs emerged showing his hand around Lawson's neck.

The pair were pictured having an argument on the terrace of a restaurant on June 9.

Lawson, 53, the daughter of former chancellor Lord Lawson, was reportedly seen weeping following the episode outside Scott's in Mayfair, central London.

Speaking to the London Evening Standard on Monday, Saatchi said: "About a week ago, we were sitting outside a restaurant having an intense debate about the children, and I held Nigella’s neck repeatedly while attempting to emphasise my point.

"There was no grip, it was a playful tiff.

"The pictures are horrific but give a far more drastic and violent impression of what took place. Nigella’s tears were because we both hate arguing, not because she had been hurt.

"We had made up by the time we were home. The paparazzi were congregated outside our house after the story broke yesterday morning, so I told Nigella to take the kids off till the dust settled."

Lawson's spokesperson has said that there won't be any comment on Saatchi's explanation but did confirm that she "isn't at the family home."

Police confirmed that they had not received a complaint of assault from Lawson or anyone else.

Conveniently done and dusted. No doubt hoping for a new story elsewhere to bury this one.

You misunderstood my post, I never said what happened was guesswork, I said the reason the paper printed them is guess work.

 

Really?  And what if it was all a misunderstanding?  What if some one did catch them play acting and some one was wrongly 'outed' as an abuser? 

 

It seems what happened here wasn't a misunderstanding, but trial by torch wielding mobs isn't the way to go.

I would say that's obvious isn't it? To sell more papers and make more money

I tend to agree the papers had their own interpretation from the outset.The same images looked  at in a different light, could suggest  something  far less abusive, because it depends on how you see the images,but many  saw the images with a view  that has already been jaundiced.

 

As it happens he's now accepted a police caution, so in effect pleading guilty, to assault, I presume.He's got away lightly and everyone will move on, quite quickly.

i think the fact that she was in tears is what swings it, JB   Didn't look like a 'playful tiff' when she's crying.   

 

I agree though - I expect they'll all move on - and maybe he'll think twice next time he's feeling 'playful'  

 

which was exactly the point I was making from the outset

Here's hoping she's left him and does'nt come back....

Eye witnesses there were quite clear about the events.

...and he's accepted a police caution. That for me makes it more likely than not that he was doing something wrong.

Police cautions can only be issued if the person admits guilt.

Playful tiff my arse, yet another abusive person minimising and justifying his behaviour, just hope his victim hasn't bought his pathetic excuse of a story