Do you remember Heather Mills?

[LucilleBluth]

I have been watching the Beatles documentary and got to thinking about her.

She was in the papers constantly in the 2000s, I remember her being painted as an absolute con artist witch. I googled a few articles about her from the time of the divorce. They are brutal in the misogynistic tone, she’s labelled as a slag, a goer, ex prostitute, you name it.

I don’t think papers write about women in such hash terms anymore. Maybe she was a bit of a twat, whoever married Saint Paul would have suffered at that time I think.

I suppose by AIBU is are the press less misogynistic.

I've just read the following in the Yoko Ono Wikipedia entry.

Two years later, however, Ono publicly compared Lennon to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, while McCartney, she said, more closely resembled his less-talented rival Antonio Salieri.

Ouch!!!

@EYProvider

You need to get out more.

@pumpkinpal

Took me about two minutes to work it out when I read that Chapman had a Salvador Dali and Norman Rockwell stuffed in his attic and had been on a round the world trip in a westerly direction.

The John taking a trip round the world in a westerly direction sounds barking, but it apparently is true, I've read about it over the years and it's in at least one book that I found whilst trying to verify it. He also sailed from New York to Bermuda in 1980 on Yoko's advice. Writing most of Double fantasy there

@LoveMySituation

There are TV interviews with both Paul and George Martin where they talk about this. Apparently Yoko had written to them telling them to go round the world in a westerly direction as well. It was her latest thing in 77-78, when John and Chapman both made the journey.

I've never paid much attention to McCartney or Mills, not being a huge Beatles fan (although I do like Sergeant Pepper) and uninterested in sleb gossip.

But this thread got me interested enough to read the court judgment and, oh dear, what a sorry story. Mills doesn't come out of it looking good.

She argued that she had been independently wealthy before she and McCartney got together and that he'd controlled her and caused her to lose income. For that reason (among many others) she claimed money from him.

But in alleging this she got basic things wrong on her evidence, eg, when she'd bought a house, and what she'd sold it for. To be clear, this was affidavit evidence, not something she'd blurted out in the witness box. She had the opportunity to check.

The judge said her evidence was unreliable: she wasn't rich before, and her earnings had actually increased during her marriage.

Oh, and some years it was hard to tell because she hadn't filed tax returns. If you're earning heaps, you'd think that at least HMRC should know about it.

It's clear that almost all the properties concerned were clearly McCartney's and Mills had no fair claim on them.

She alleged McCartney was tight, and didn't support her charity work. The court found this was, as a simple matter of fact, wrong.

Her best claim was that she should be kept in something like the style she'd been accustomed to in her marriage. Which means McCartney wasn't tight.

The most misogynistic part of this is the idea what if Beauty puts her hand in the Beast's paw, the Beast is ungallant if he doesn't shower Beauty with gold and expect her to take away even more when she leaves. That's the only way anyone can say Mills was hard done by.

@TomPinch

I've never paid much attention to McCartney or Mills, not being a huge Beatles fan (although I do like Sergeant Pepper) and uninterested in sleb gossip.

But this thread got me interested enough to read the court judgment and, oh dear, what a sorry story. Mills doesn't come out of it looking good.

She argued that she had been independently wealthy before she and McCartney got together and that he'd controlled her and caused her to lose income. For that reason (among many others) she claimed money from him.

But in alleging this she got basic things wrong on her evidence, eg, when she'd bought a house, and what she'd sold it for. To be clear, this was affidavit evidence, not something she'd blurted out in the witness box. She had the opportunity to check.

The judge said her evidence was unreliable: she wasn't rich before, and her earnings had actually increased during her marriage.

Oh, and some years it was hard to tell because she hadn't filed tax returns. If you're earning heaps, you'd think that at least HMRC should know about it.

It's clear that almost all the properties concerned were clearly McCartney's and Mills had no fair claim on them.

She alleged McCartney was tight, and didn't support her charity work. The court found this was, as a simple matter of fact, wrong.

Her best claim was that she should be kept in something like the style she'd been accustomed to in her marriage. Which means McCartney wasn't tight.

The most misogynistic part of this is the idea what if Beauty puts her hand in the Beast's paw, the Beast is ungallant if he doesn't shower Beauty with gold and expect her to take away even more when she leaves. That's the only way anyone can say Mills was hard done by.

@TomPinch

Dear Lord, what a sad little life, Heather. You ruined my life, completely, so you could have the money, but I hope now you spend it on getting some lessons in grace and decorum because you have all the grace of a reversing dump truck without any tyres on.

Paul McCartney statement, post family court judgement, February 2008

The unpleasing waft of sleb dirty laundry.

On the back of this thread I have started to watch the Get Back documentary thingy on Disney Plus , I am an hour into the first episode but I'm not gripped at all, is it worth persevering?Has anyone watched the whole thing (there's a lot of it!).

@TomPinch I and others have talked about their child Beatrice. Beatrice lived with Heather. Yes it was a tight divorce settlement and related to 0.25% of McCartneys wealth. He could have been generous to his daughter and it would have had zero impact on his own standard of living.

@YokoOnosHat

@SisterJude

You actually believe that?

Just think about it for 30 seconds. What are the odds that Chapman would be a satantist art collector who had been on a round the world trip in a westerly direction?

And that’s before you get to the part about the six bullets ‘for John Lennon’ and Kenneth’s Anger’s appearance at the crime scene the day after it happened.

This isn’t a conspiracy theory; these are facts. My interpretation of them might be a conspiracy theory, but even a cursory examination of the facts would make most people suspicious.

EYProvider, I may regret asking this but what is the significance of mark Chapman doing a world trip in a westerly direction? You have menitioned it several times, is there an assumption it has some mystic (for want of a better word) rather than geographical convenience?

@tomorrowalready

I have no idea what the logic was, but I suppose it was either the I Ching, the tarot cards or the crystal ball that convinced Yoko this was necessary. She sent John off on a westerly direction trip in the mid 70s and sent Paul and George Martin postcards trying to convince them to do the trip also.

Of course, she didn’t recommend they do the trip WITH John. Paul especially had to kept away from John at all costs. He had way too much influence.

Where is the evidence that Chapman went round the world specifically in a westerly direction? As far as I know, he planned the trip with a travel agent who later became(and is still) his wife

Oh, I am sorry EYProvider I misunderstood, I thought you were saying Chapman had gone on the trip. Must admit I looked him (Chapman) up a bit and it did mention he had travelled in Vietnam etc so I was confused. So do you mean it was odd if John Lennon took a world trip when he was living in New York that he started from American West? I remember Lennon being shot as I lived in a bedsit at the time and only had a radio so listened all the time and remember the disbelief in reporter's voice as the news broke. If Chapman was being manipulated by Yoko Ono what was in it for him? He has been in prison ever since. It seems more likely he is another deluded obsessional with an unfortunate easy access to firearms as we see so much in the USA.

I mean what evidence is there that he did it for woo reasons rather than convenience? Thirty years ago, I read a very well researched book written by a lawyer called Who killed John Lennon. It's out of print now, and the authors is dead. But it was brilliant. Exploded a few myths

@tomorrowalready

Chapman also went on a round the world trip in a westerly direction.

@LoveMySituation

His wife was his travel agent apparently. She was also a satanist - if you look her up on the internet, you’ll find she has given interviews confirming this.

I don’t think for a minute that Chapman was being manipulated by Yoko. There’s no way she would have got her hands dirty like that. I think it’s highly likely that Chapman had links to the Church of Satan.

LoveMySituation, I hope I have not caused the confusion about who went on the westerly world trip. I misundersttod what EYProvider said and now she has clarified Yoko Ono arranged it for John Lennon, I know nothing about that. What myths did the authors explode? I truly never knew there were any myths, had always assumed Chapman was as I said a deluded obsessional who are so common and so dangerous when armed. I did go down a small rabbit hole to find out more the other night but remembered it was late so gave it up.

I know the business that is show has many,. many secrets and lies, some of them squalid and sordid to the nth degree so nothing can seem too far-fetched. I actually think all progammes, shows, music productions etc should come with a health warning - 'may be damaging to your mental health'. And I say that as someone who just sat through Strictly Come Dancing!

I meant to apologise for derailing the thread to those interested in the Mills/McCartney thing. Personally, I never took to Paul as a personality but then I am allergic to celebrities - you don't get to the top and cling on for decades by being 'nice'. And he was a mature man-of-the -world when he met her so must have been able to assess her personality and married her anyway.

No, don't worry no confusion @ tomorrow. I was just trying to find out why EY thinks Chapman went round the world in a westerly direction, and why that links in with John doing the same thing. The book I mentioned showed that although everyone thinks Chapman was a 'deranged fan' of John Lennon, he wasn't (he was obsessed with Todd Rundgren and had a list of other celebs he was thinking of killing) and went into microscopic detail about everything(as befits a lawyer!) Few interesting theories too. That other books are now claiming as their own. But there are so many unanswered questions, why was he in Beirut? How did he know enough about guns to make sure the bullets would serve their purpose?
EY, Gloria is a Christian, there's no way she would be a satanist!

I agree also tomorrow, if you get that big and stay there, you are not 'nice' there's a core of steel somewhere. I think Paul's been pretty open about why he was first attracted to Heather and she was certainly aware that on their first alone meeting discussing her charity work, that he was ogling her bottom!

Gloria might be a Christian these days, but she was a satanist back then. She gave an interview for cmalliance.org, titled ‘My Husband Shot John Lennon’, where she described in great detail how she would pray to Satan.

I see the interview has been taken down, which doesn’t surprise me.

Paul first spotted Heather when she gave a speech at a charity do, it's on video. She walked braless up to the lectern, Paul was hooked.