Lawson/Saatchi Verdict

I'm pleased.

You can't give someone a free rein with a credit card, turn a blind eye because they are reliable employees who fit it with your lifestyle and then yank in the chain because your personal life's gone up the Swanee.

I feel sorry that Nigella has been put through the mill but Saatchi should have left well alone.

The trial seemed to put Nigella on trial rather than the two ladies however I feel that both Satchi and Nigella were foolish to trust anyone with free access to funds however much they trusted them. I know the ladies were found not guilty but I do think they should not have been so liberal with their employees money.

When the problem was uncovered the Grillos apologised and offered to repay the monies but then baulked at signing documents. They also emailed Nigella and Saatchi and begged to be forgiven None of this seems to indicate innocence to me. The drugs accusations only came to light in the last few weeks before the trial started and smacks of a desperate need to find a defence for the greed and misuse of monies which were not theirs. If what they claim were true and Nigella authorised their profligate spending in order to keep them quiet, then that was blackmail.

I think the Prosecution was inept in this case and also that the Judge let the defence make too much of the problems between Nigella and Saatchi. It seemed that Nigella was on trial rather than the Grillos.

This verdict does not feel right to me at all.

No, not to me either.

Seems the right verdict to me.

I didn't follow the trial in minute detail but from what I gather they had a number of other assistants who were also free-spending on the credit cards, but not to the extent of the Grillos who seem to have got carried away.

They appear not to have hidden the expenditure or try and manipulate the paperwork or forge signatures, so that's why it wasn't fraud, IMO.

It went on for years and was signed-off by the accountant.

Nigella hopes make it big in the US of A .
Hope his spitefulness doesn't spoil that.
They can be a sniffy over there , so I have heard !
Good luck to her she is well shut !

Hmm ...I'm quite surprised on the one hand, but on the other hand, not.

Mostly I agree with merlot.

Also, it comes down to evidence and hard facts, and by the sounds of it, the evidence is that there were no strict guidelines as to how much was reasonable to spend, or how the credit cards could be used. And all that talk (by Nigella too) that they were 'part of the family'. Anyway what a mess. No one has come out of this particularly well.

Nigella, to err is human - just thank the Lord that you are rid of that peevish, nasty control freak.

How can he say that he still loves her when he has put her through all that? He's a wicked hypocrite.

Team Nigella on here then? Don't mean to be too flippant, as I am with others in feeling that Nigella has been put through the mill. It has felt like she's been on trial. These 2 women may have been acquitted, but they don't come out of it looking good in my view. The refusal to comply with written agreements to repay their overspend, and then to bring in aspects of Nigella's personal life in the way they did doesn't endear them to me. I expect they'll now further exploit Nigella (and the dreadful Saatchi) by writing their life stories, with full detail about the personal lives of the family they were employed by, and it seems treated well by

Iam64 If you were in their shoes would you not heed the advice of your defence lawyer and stick to the version of events that you believe to be correct?

The money was a pimple on an elephant's bum to Saatchi. He knew that by taking them to court they would defend themselves by dragging Nigella's reputation in the dirt. He wanted to damage her far more than he wanted to prosecute them.

How interesting that in the messages so far ''she'' is referred to as Nigella, and 'he' as Saatchi.
The use of the surname / family name in such a way is usually reserved for the very famous, e.g Churchill, Thatcher - or convicted criminals, the Wests; Crippin ...

Also interesting - if it were not for Saatchi and Saatchi, Thatcher wouldn't have become 'very famous'!

Seems pretty irrelevant to me, AAAHappyMan - Nigella Lawson is widely known as Nigella - her books, TV programmes etc whereas her ex-husband is best known from his surname. QED

I think the verdict reflects the distaste many people feel for Saatchi

Fraud - maybe not, but certainly abuse and exploitation. Saatchi has played dirty from the start, and the women around him have all been put on trial. I feel sorry for Nigella - she's had a rough ride and whatever drug use there was appears to have been used as a crutch. She holds down a career and doesn't appear to have a habit. Probably doesn't need to self-medicate now she's cleared her life of that lot.

As they have been found innocent that would mean what they have said on the stand as true facts. So has everything Nigella Lawson said on the stand a lie including the denial that she takes cocaine ? I felt so sorry for her as she stoically went into the court to be torn to pieces - that and the fact she appeared to have been married to a violent man.

As a bookkeeper I dealt with corporate credit cards and looked at the statements every month, querying anything that looked wrong. To go years without querying expenditure is unbelievable. Someone must have seen the monthly statements and accepted them.

So the women were correctly found not guilty of theft imho. I would query their ethics and greed, but these are not legal matters. Their father was a mafia criminal and did 15 years for a brutal kidnapping; this came out after the verdict.

Tales of the rich and shameless, eh?

Nigella has a tremendous amount of support but I dread to think what's going to come out now that the Grillos have been 'whisked off' by the newspapers who are no doubt paying them shedloads to dish the dirt.

They've obviously been very close to Nigella over the years. They are acknowledged in her books and one of them has appeared in TV clips. The huge amounts of money they spent were not an issue until Saatchi threw his toys out of the pram. I feel a bit sorry for them as well because they've been used.

Saatchi's daughter must be having a horrible time because I think she was also used by him to criticise Nigella when they split up.

What a horrible man

Yes Merlotgran, you are so right. Well, I would say that, because I posted a similar comment on the other thread.

I'll do my best to memorise your posts in future, Iam64

Total , total mess, and all because of the whim of some Ego-centric .

I was PA for 16 years to a family who were a good deal wealthier than these two. I had the use of their card to make online and telephone purchases for them and a chequebook to pay bills, but there is absolutely no way that I would ever have used their money for anything personal, whether they had given permission or not. To do so in that position would be insane - apart from the fact that it would go against every moral instinct I have, even if I had been given permission I would have felt incredibly uncomfortable : a very dangerous path and one which leaves you, the employee, incredibly vulnerable (it so open to misunderstandings or they could deny they gave permission). On top of that, if it all came to grief, all your experience and professional acumen would come to nought because no one would employ you again. A sad story for everyone involved.

I feel quite alone in all this. For Nigella read Diana and here we go again, none of it was my fault.

Your post is rather cryptic Anniebach but I think I get your drift.

You are far from being alone, just in the minority on GN.