Geri Halliwell Says Baby Was Abused

VainJane

Active Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
1,975
Reaction score
2
Geri's baby abuse claim investigated



Geri Halliwell's three-month-old daughter is focus of a police investigation into allegations of abuse after being found covered with bruises.
The former Spice Girl called the police after leaving her baby with a temporary nanny while she went for a walk with friends.
When she returned, she was horrified to find her daughter, Bluebell, screaming in apparent distress and with bruising on her arm.
Furious, she then shouted at the nanny: 'What's happened? What have you done to my baby?' and was alarmed when the nanny refused to answer. The incident happened while Halliwell, 34, was staying with two friends at a luxury cottage in the grounds of Liphook Golf Club, in Hampshire, last month.
The nanny is believed to have been hired from an agency while the singer looked for a permanent carer.
Scotland Yard yesterday confirmed that it had launched an investigation into 'an allegation of physical abuse against a three-month-old baby.' It said: 'Officers from our Child Abuse Investigations Unit are investigating and inquiries are continuing. There have been no arrests.
'We emphasise that the allegations of abuse are of a physical and not sexual nature.'
Halliwell gave birth to Bluebell in May but no longer has anything to do with the baby's father, Sacha Gervasi, a 40-year-old British born screenwriter who lives in Hollywood.
The couple were introduced by Robbie Williams and soon embarked on a six-week affair during which Halliwell conceived.
However, early on in the pregnancy, they had a bitter row and Halliwell refused to have anything more to do with him.
According to reports, Halliwell was 'absolutely hysterical' when she confronted the nanny.
'Bluebell is such a happy little girl and it broke Geri up to see her in such a state,' the News of the World quoted a friend as saying. '[Geri] could tell that this was not just a baby's tantrum, so she checked Bluebell and found bruising on her arm.
'It was the silence from the nanny that so alarmed Geri. It the nanny had explained there had been an accident, she maybe could have understood.
'Geri has barely let Bluebell out of her sight since the birth. Then when she finally leaves her with someone all hell breaks loose.' Halliwell, who is currently single, has told how she chose the unusual name for her daughter after going for a walk in the park during the last few days of her pregnancy and seeing 'bluebells everywhere.'
'Then what really clinched it for me was my mother telling me that the bluebell is increasingly rare - so it's a precious flower, which seems just right for my daughter,' she said.
Despite not being able to crawl, the tot is already getting used to the showbusiness lifestyle.
Within days of being born, she was photographed for Hello! magazine in a deal which reportedly netted Halliwell a six-figure sum. A statement from Halliwell's personal assistant yesterday confirmed that the singer had visited a police station in London on August 18 to make the complaint. It went on: 'Bluebell is now happy and well, and there are no further concerns for her welfare.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=403416&in_page_id=1773
 
:o omg that is awful!

I cannot begin to explain how effing furious I get when I hear about this kind of things :angry:
Had it been my baby I think I don't even know what I would've done to this woman! What would make a person hurt a 3-month old baby?!! Man I am sooo mad, seriously!! I hope this nanny goes to jail and never leaves :furious:
 
Well, terrible story (!) but...

-why leave your 3-month-old daughter with a stranger (->irresponsible!)

-why is this made public? Geri Halliwell is the worst publicity-wh*re EVER! I even believe she put herself on an eating-disorder just for the publicity :yuk: So I am not surprised that she tries to get publicity out of something terrible like that as well :doh:
 
This is why we shouldn't hire complete strangers to care for our children.
 
Retro said:
This is why we shouldn't hire complete strangers to care for our children.

Oh, come on! People hire nannies all the time. Plus, so she didn't find the nanny on the street, she hired her from an agency. So please, hiring a (presumably) qualified person to take care of your child over a few hours is not responsible, it's a daily fact for normal people. She couldn't have known that the nanny do such an awful thing. But I also blame the agency and maybe they should be asked some questions, too.
 
Why does she have to hired a stranger? Why can't she take care of her own kid?
 
Retro said:
Why does she have to hired a stranger? Why can't she take care of her own kid?

taking care of your child doesn't mean you have to get by without the help of strangers. i mean, if the man who drives a school bus gets into an accident the last thing you do is blame the parents for abandoning their children to a stranger. i can't see anything wrong with hiring a nanny for your child, everybody needs a little time for him or herself, and she's a single mom. i second what oanadobre said.
 
Retro said:
Why does she have to hired a stranger? Why can't she take care of her own kid?

Because with all the benefits of the western world, there are also disadvantages. Namely the fact that people dont live in the sort of communities that people elsewhere take for granted. Disadvantages come along with advantages in very realistic sets of twos. I find.
 
Retro said:
Why does she have to hired a stranger? Why can't she take care of her own kid?

Because she's busy, she has a hard life dammit! Wait, no, she's just a stupid publicity seeking loser who can't even look after her own kid even when she has nothing else to do.
 
Im sad for the baby...BUT HOW pathetic to let your own kid be with a stranger?

hmmmm ...... :doh:
 
I think that's really harsh to say "how pathetic to let your own kid be with a stranger". I'd be careful about what you say because i'm sure there are a few au paires or nannies in here and if you brand them all as abusive nutcases who can't be trusted then you're making a harsh statement against a whole profession.
 
Um, first off, no one is insulting nannies or aupairs. I'm sure there are plenty who do a wonderful job, helping people who maybe do need help looking after their kid. But hiring a person off an agency you've not had a chance to get to know, be sure of, is always incredibly stupid. You don't know what this person is like really and if you are a new mother, your babies safety and your own reassurance would come first over taking a walk with your friends. So many celebrities barely look after their children, most of them have more time than real hard working single parents/busy families and money, they could be with their kids more but instead they choose nannies. It's just pure lazyness to make the biggest choice to have a kid and then just leave it with a nanny once the fun factor has worn off.
 
All i'm saying is, the hired help will usually always be a stranger. And even if you spend every day with them for 5 months you don't know what they're like on their own. So it's a case of taking that 'risk' which hundreds of thousands of single/busy women do every week, in many cases. I'm not defending Geri because i've never liked her, but this quote seems a bit unfair: "Why does she have to hired a stranger? Why can't she take care of her own kid?" when the article states " 'Geri has barely let Bluebell out of her sight since the birth."
 
i totally agree with you misssa, i do not se anything wrong with hiring a nanny, espcecially becuase every owman needs some time off to take care of herself, that however does not mean to be a bad mother/person. if there is one person to be blamed, it is the nanny and maybe the agency. besides, no matter how well you know someone, they can still turn out to be horrible persons
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->