Soup of British magnate was allegedly spiked with windshield washer fluid
Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comNanny accused of poisoning sex-toy queen
Seeded on Wed Jan 5, 2011 2:26 PM EST (msnbc.com)
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
What a waste of time.
i agree, but the Brits have a wonderful way of writing their laws:
Obviously, you've never been poisoned by someone in such a matter - that you knew of.
What if that "bad food" you had had been tampered with by an employee "for fun"? Should it be counted a "prank" when your health and life were risked for their thrills? What about how you suffered through being ill for a couple days (or longer) over it, never understanding where this "flu bug" came from and not able to go to work because of it?
I'm sure you'd feel differently if you knew someone purposely with malice was the cause of your illness. What that nanny did was despicable.
Head of Adult entertainment in Britain poisoned by Cox.
Heheh.
First paragraph "Jacqueline Gold brought sex toys to the British masses one set of pink furry handcuffs at a time, amassing a fortune while reinventing the family lingerie company as a female-focused brand."
'family' lingerie company?
I'm not a prude, but just what roles do the children play?
Hehehehe
"Family" in that "a family" is often what happens after a couple finds time to use her wares ;)
Or maybe "family" in that is is family owned, which is the more likely translation =)
Haha - I would like to assume that it's implying it is a family-owned company, not a company which produces family-oriented products. :P
She was probably pissed off that her vibrator broke and wasn't covered under warranty.
I am waiting for all the posts from the Food Nazis. How dare this article state that sugar "is not particularly poisonous"!
Sounds like a clear case of electronic penis envy.
Cox was just trying to make it finger lickin good, and she did it lickity split!
I think any hard evidence for this is weak. I mean, out of the trash? come on.
Intent to annoy.. cracks me up.
Most wind shield washer fluids these days contain antifreeze, and that is toxic substance and does build up in the system over time if ingested.
If the victim was diabetic, then you could "poison" her with sugar.
If the woman was on a low salt diet for health reasons, you could "poison" her with salt.
The Nanny would have known these things and could have taken advantage of them. Even if her intent was not to outright kill her but destroy her health and make her ill, she still should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Sad truth is, some people don't need a real motive to do things like this. The Nanny might have mental issues or felt slighted by not getting "more" money or a bigger bonus, or perhaps she took offense or was disapproving of the woman for some reason. There are plenty of crazies out there like that.
I suggest they check on the kid and see what the Nanny was "feeding" her, both food-wise and figuratively. Who knows how much she poisoned the child mentally. A real life "Hand that rocks the cradle" moment...
Yes, poisoning someone with anything, whether the intent is to annoy or kill, is wrong.
This article still sounds pretty baseless though. Sugar...? I'm sure if the victim was diabetic, the 'poisoning' with sugar would have been more serious of a claim than an 'annoyance.' However, the article does not specify that the victim was diabetic, which in this case would have been pertinent information. Same goes for salt. It doesn't specify that she was on any sort of low-sodium diet or that it did anything to her health.
There seems to be little to no evidence of the nanny having done anything at all. Yes, she could have been mentally unstable and all, but Gold could be as well. Just as much as their are weirdos who poison with no apparent motivation, there's people who would accuse someone of poisoning them just because they didn't like them (or thought it would be fun.)
All this article states is that Gold thought her food tasted funny. It never states that she actually experienced any nausea or otherwise any discomfort (other than to her palate.) Besides, it seems to me that with the amount required to poison a bowl of soup, Gold would have noticed something more than it "tasting odd," (more like it being inedible.)
The article also doesn't elaborate at all about what the chef found. It just says she/he took the leftover broth from the trash bin to investigate - And nothing more. Where and when did this 'windshield-cleaning fluid' accusation come into play?
Honestly, it sounds like Gold got upset for whatever reason with her Nanny and decided to accuse her of this. Firstly, there's no mention of her actually becoming ill. Secondly, the 'windshield-wiper fluid' accusation seems to appear out of thin air - Who found it? Did the chef check out the leftover broth (which seems to have been left un-investigated by authorities) and immediately determine that it was windshield-wiper fluid? You'd think that if the Nanny wanted to make her ill (or kill her) she would have looked up something better than a cleaning fluid which apparently did nothing except annoy Gold and making her food 'taste odd.' Sounds like a petty cat-fight all around.
I think Allison Cox is pretty cool guy. eh poisons boss with salt and doesn't afraid of anything.