Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Heather Mills to appeal against £24.3m settlement!

316 replies

mumemma · 17/03/2008 13:47

How can that not be enough? The papers are going to have a field day.....

OP posts:
mumemma · 18/03/2008 23:40

Holy God, The Sun really is having a field day - their front page is "Pornocchio" - see below - scroll through for front pages:

news.sky.com/skynews/picture_gallery/0,,91232-1309903,00.html

Apologies for dubious Sky News link .

Her lawyer said on the news earlier that her reputation was not in tatters

OP posts:
tensmum · 19/03/2008 00:07

did any one else have a vision of the judge banging his head on the table in frustration because of heather mills.

lemonstartree · 19/03/2008 07:47

Xenia I dont think she HAS any self respect, and that may be a part of the underlying problem

Youcannotbeserious · 19/03/2008 09:39

To be fair though, her repuation was in tatters before this.... Did anyone really believe the judge was going to say any different?

I did like the whole thing about her being one of the top ten public speakers... FFS! Get a grip woman!!!!!!!!!!!

And, you really don't go on national TV slagging off the press and then expect them to be kind to you... though, to give the woman her due, she'd win a gurning competition hands down - Kerry Katona can't pull faces as good as Heather!!!!!!!!!!!

spokette · 19/03/2008 09:56

"She says she helped him write songs. "

This for me sums up the delusion of the woman.

LieselVonTrapp · 19/03/2008 10:04

Repellant woman

harpsichordcarrier · 19/03/2008 10:06

"...I am driven to the conclusion that much of her evidence, both written and oral, was not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid."
this is clearly judge-speak for this woman is a big fat liar and her pants were SO on fire....

Youcannotbeserious · 19/03/2008 10:09

Problem is, she's far from the only woman who has tried to screw the ex husband like this...........

I'm glad her behaviour has been called...

Though I doubt there is any help for her (and more sadly, her daughter!)

spokette · 19/03/2008 10:10

Also, how can call PM mean when he loaned money so that her sister and PA could each buy a house plus he gave over £3million to a landmine charity plus over generous allowances that he gave her?

On top of that, she tried to defraud him to pay off a non-fictious mortgage - my goodness, the woman is horrific.

Judy1234 · 19/03/2008 13:42

Yes, he should never have got involved in the first place. Silly error of judgment presumably just because she was much younger, a model etc.

Scattybird · 19/03/2008 16:55

I know it's a load of bx but I read this today (so I was bored) but the figures being bandied around in this are astronomical. The judge really goes into one.

It IS 58 pages long but fascinating if you are bored.

Scattybird · 19/03/2008 16:58

According to the judges summing up, she tried to get one of his business managers to pay of a mortgage on a house which was paid for. Methinks she was just trying it on to get some cash in her bin. I don't think Paul knew about it either from what it says.

Also it rips to pieces the fact that she says she had 2-3 million in cash when she met him. Errrr - is it 2 or 3? Surely you would know whether you had 2 or 3 million pounds. Sheeeeeeeeesh.

beaniesteve · 19/03/2008 17:02

I've read the whole report and although I think it does show that Heather Mills McCartney was unable to produce a lot of documents, the Judge was surprisingly accommodating when it came to believing everything Paul McCartney said.

When my dad divorced my mum he deliberately underestimated his assets in an attempt to get my mum to sell the house and split the proceeds (He attempted to make it prohibitively expensive for her to buy him out) but it didn't work. It does seem like Paul McCartney has been given the benefit of teh doubt while Heather was not RE his wealth and his behaviour during the marriage.

Money aside I think it's really unfair that the Judge agreed their union only properly began when they got married.

I also think that the newspapers which have printed vile stuff about her in the last few days and the people who are so ready to believe them are very very wrong not to mention incredibly mean spirited.

These are the same people who are up in arms about recent stuff to do with the Mccanns.

Isn't it funny how some people take what the red-tops write as the truth when it suits them but then freak out when they say something about people they like?

I don't know if Heather Mills McCartney is a liar, a bitch or a gold-digger and I seriously have a hard time warming to anyone who can say they hate her just because of what they read in the papers.

It takes two to make a bad marriage and heaven forbid no one I know ever finds themselves in a situation where they are villified by people they don't even know because of their marriage.

Scattybird · 19/03/2008 17:03

Sorry realised that the judgement has already been linked.

I DID like the bit where the judge says that a huge house would not be appropriate as they lived in an, albeit large shed on his farmland

Scattybird · 19/03/2008 17:05

I have not read any newspapers only the judgement which I think is bad enough. But it's not hearsay is it, it's a judge saying how it is. She has really tried it on to be honest. If there were any tax returns for the years she claimed that her earnings were millions, then the IR would have them and she would have been able to produce them. It's all lies and whether it's an old boys club going on or not, she doesn't look great.

Mercy · 19/03/2008 17:13

I can't quite believe I that I actually read quite a lot the judgement this morning! It was utterly fascinating tbh.

I particularly liked this bit

"She seeks an award commensurate with being the wife of, and the mother of the child of, an icon"

I was surprised to see a number of comments on HM's personality though - is that usual?

Scattybird · 19/03/2008 17:17

I have no idea, but everyone at work knew to ignore me whilst I read it . I think it's the most open thing I have read about super rich people. The figures are amazing. I was surprised about the 3 bedroom shed/log cabin. You are right it was totally fascinating.

beaniesteve · 19/03/2008 17:17

Also I wonder how usual it is to mention the Husband's ex wife in a judgement like this. It's almost as if the judge was unable to pass judgement without bias or influence and without comparison.

Lynda McCartney had nothing to do with this divorce. Any suggestion made by Heather to do with Domestic violence towards Lynda was disallowed and both parties agreed not to introduce any domestic abuse/bugging evidence into the proceedings.

FioFio · 19/03/2008 17:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

beaniesteve · 19/03/2008 17:22

I was struck by how little security Paul McCartney says he has.

Though I am sure that now all his security arrangements (or lack of) and his homes have been made public he'll be upping his secority quick-smart.

bundle · 19/03/2008 17:23

lol @ harpsi's judgespeak for pants on fire...

Youcannotbeserious · 19/03/2008 17:50

Beaniesteve - I doubt that PM was given the 'benefit of the doubt' - much more likely that he provided the evidence to back up what he was saying....

To be fair, I am sure a bloke as wealthy as PM is already on every tax fiddle known to a decent accountant, so he may very well have under estimated his assets (anyone remember when Michael Hutchence died, he was peniless and the same thing has happened to Heath Ledger) but i don't think it was solely to defraud HM out of her rightful inheritance.

And, I think LM got a mention because HM was trying to claim that she single handedly brought PM back from the brink after LM's death....

Personally, my favorite bit was when she said she'd 'great improved' the relationship between father and daughters - I mean, she certainly provided some common ground for Paul and Stella - they both bl**dy hate her!!!

Beetroot · 19/03/2008 17:52

i still don't understand why she gets so much.

Beetroot · 19/03/2008 17:53

and I agree with YCBS

Joash · 19/03/2008 18:21

can't stand either of them, asfor the money, it is all relative realy.However, by comparison (If I have worked this our right & rounding them up to make this easier). If he is worth 800 million and she got 25 million, she got 3.% of his money. Would you all be saying she was a nutter if her husband was worth only a million and she got 30,000

Swipe left for the next trending thread