Mills gets £24.3m from Sir Paul in divorce settlement

[Blue Velvet]

To gold-dig, one would only need to hang out in the right circles, and her background lends itself well to that idea.

She met Paul McCartney at the Pride of Britain charity event in April 1999, where she was presenting an award for courage and made an appeal on behalf of her charity, the Heather Mills Trust, which provides prosthetic limbs for landmine victims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Mills

It's not unreasonable for those who have suffered accidents — as she had herself — to work for and set up charities... hers was set up long before she even met McCartney. They married over three years later. Your slightly contemptuous claim of a 'background' without examining his speaks volumes. Speaking as someone who works for and knows the charity sector in the UK, I can tell you there's not a lot of spare cash floating around, in other words, it's not the scene for gold-diggers.

I still am not seeing why it's "fair".

Because a high court divorce judge has said so, someone far more qualified to rule on this case than you or I.

That was echoed by Carol Ellinas, a partner at the London-based Bross Bennett firm. "Justice has been done. She was always going to end up wealthy. But at the same time, the judgment has not dented his fortune. If you work out the percentage, she gets a tiny per cent," she said.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article3568097.ece

That seems a little reactionary and playing the gender card to me.

And it's true and you know it.

A google search for "Keven Federline Gold Digger" returns 20 000 more hits than one of the same for Mills. Mills wins "scum" by a slim margin, and K-Fed takes home the "trash" medal by a cool 100 000.

This is the extent of an argument? One is an American celebrity, for want of a better word, with all the exposure that implies especially amongst younger people, the other English, who most teenagers probably wouldn't have even heard of until now. Trash is not a word often used here in the UK to refer to people, so it's not surprising that it doesn't generate many hits for Heather Mills.

 

[edesignuk]

The bitch is mad.

Source (before anyone questions it).

Indeed, how can this be taken as anything else other than what it quite plainly is, complete and utter greed.

 

[mcarnes]

If the judge, after considering all the submissions and evidence from both parties thought this was a fair settlement, then who am I to disagree?

There are many, many examples of judgements throughout history that go against common sense, or common decency for that matter.

 

[a456]

She was awarded roughly 6% of his net worth after being married to him for 6% of his life. Not a bad deal for her.

The 6% at which he was most wealthy as well. I think that £35k a year is easily enough to ruin a kid and no doubt she will be the next media circus when she comes of age, and enjoys Class A and Class B equally

 

[Blue Velvet]

There are many, many examples of judgements throughout history that go against common sense, or common decency for that matter.

Common sense or common decency — shorthand for a set of prejudices — have no standing in law. What you personally would call common decency does not apply to me.

 

[iBlue]

I think she is a sniveling, greedy little hussy. It's not that uncommon a problem, it's just that it's an unfathomable amount to most and she's draining it from a legend, rather undeservingly.
She's going to be fine. We needn't worry about Heather Mills.


I'm iBlue, and I approve this message.

 

[iAthena]

I wonder why Paul didn't get her to sign a pre-nup in the first place.

I don't think that the outcome was too outrageous compared to other divorces, but it does make me angry that she comments to the press. Paul has shown a lot more class in this respect.

 

[emw]

I don't really begrudge her the money - he entered into this knowing that he was "vulnerable" to this and decided not to sign any sort of pre-nup. If I were in a similar situation, I'd likely try to get what I could as well.

Christ, he has a £400M net worth. It's not like he'll now be out on the streets. And who knows what happened behind closed doors with those two?

Let's say my personal "fortune" is rated at a paltry $1,000,000. That would be like me getting divorced and giving my wife $40,000 and one of the cars. And really even less, because more of my worth is required to keep me financially viable. He could lose £200M and still be fabulously wealthy. If I lost $500,000 I'd be living in a cardboard box.

 

[Markleshark]

Source (before anyone questions it).

Indeed, how can this be taken as anything else other than what it quite plainly is, complete and utter greed.

Thanks e.

I'll put money on Beatles on iTunes in a week or two now. That'll be worth, what, £100million?

 

[iBlue]

That's sort of a different thing, emw. Even if it's not the most spectacular percentage compared to many divorces, it's a lot more difficult to survive on $40k and a car versus £25mil and whatever else she has because of Sir Paul. (but I realize your point isn't that different than that, just saying that percentage wise matters less because it's a lot more money where Mills is concerned. It's enough.) I just imagine she would have never ever made that sort of money in her life had it not been for him.

 

[Blue Velvet]

If I lost $500,000 I'd be living in a cardboard box.

But you'd at least make sure it was a MacPro box, right? After all, that Mac smell alone would make it worth it. You wouldn't suffer for lack of visitors judging by some of the comments on this forum.

 

[emw]

^

Maybe two put together so I could stretch out a bit. I'd live near the Apple Store in the mall parking lot so I could do updates from time to time.

 

[Gaelic1]

I've seen clips of her, I don't find her particularly appealing as a person, but that's not the point. She was proposed to, her work for amputee charities is undoubted, she was then divorced... and besides, those who usually vociferously condemn porn stars on one hand are usually enjoying their wares with the other.

My, are we a little uptight or do you always deal in such broad generalities?

 

[mondesi43]

fair?

Was she making 12.5M / year before she met him....doubt it. Why does she deserve any more than what she was making before they married + 1/2 of whatever she helped to bring in? Nobody really knew who she was before she started dating him.

Now she's complaining about not being able to fly her kid first class? Sorry but I don't make little more than half of what she gets in child support. Big middle finger to her and her attitude.

It was stupid on Paul's part on not getting a prenup. Not every woman is like Linda. Most of them dating older wealthy guys are in it for one thing, and one thing only: The payoff in death or divorce.

From CNN:
"Mills had sought an award of nearly 125 million pounds ($251 million), the court said, while McCartney proposed 15.8 million pounds ($31.6 million). "

Was she in it for love, or just a lottery pay out?

 

[madoka]

I remember at the beginning of the divorce how Mills claimed that it was NOT about the money at all. Very similar to the accuser in Kobe's rape case when she repeatedly claimed that she didn't want a single dollar from him. But then in the end, we learned in both cases that it was always about the money.

 

[madoka]

What you personally would call common decency does not apply to me.

And this is precisely why people are so upset over Mills and disagree with you.

 

[saltyzoo]

Because a high court divorce judge has said so, someone far more qualified to rule on this case than you or I.

LOL Thanks for the chuckle.

On topic: Who cares? So she's greedy? So what? It's not as though he's going to be homeless now. Put in perspective, if you have $1,000,000 in assets 6% would have been $60,000. That would hardly be a hardship to you. If it think it would, then make her sign a prenup before marrying.

 

[Kamera RAWr]

Reading this thread, I'm reminded a little bit of Eddie Murphy's Johnny Carson bit from Raw

 

[Iscariot]

It's not unreasonable for those who have suffered accidents — as she had herself — to work for and set up charities... hers was set up long before she even met McCartney. They married over three years later. Your slightly contemptuous claim of a 'background' without examining his speaks volumes. Speaking as someone who works for and knows the charity sector in the UK, I can tell you there's not a lot of spare cash floating around, in other words, it's not the scene for gold-diggers.

The fact that you would go so far as to claim contempt on my part speaks far more volumes about the gender politicking you seem wholly comfortable with doing on this topic than on any lack of examination on my part. Mills is an active participant in largely the same charity field that I am. She stands for a lot of the same things I stand for. I'm not the type to just throw out a glib condemnation of someone without examining it, least of all someone who is working towards the same ends I am. I think my post history should be fairly indicative of that.

Of course men aren't going to want to see a woman walk away from a marriage with a lot of money they feel she doesn't deserve. I'm sure women don't want to see a man walking away with a lot of money they feel he didn't deserve, which is likely why you brought up the cases of Sean Penn and Kevin Federline. Cases which also go to show that divorce can be startlingly unfair to anyone, which as far as I'm concerned is much more what this is about than anything.

Because a high court divorce judge has said so, someone far more qualified to rule on this case than you or I.

So anytime in the past or future you disagree with any law or ruling, you should be satisfied with a response of "well, a judge said so"? Somehow I doubt you're going to accept that, and rightly so.

This is the extent of an argument? One is an American celebrity, for want of a better word, with all the exposure that implies especially amongst younger people, the other English, who most teenagers probably wouldn't have even heard of until now. Trash is not a word often used here in the UK to refer to people, so it's not surprising that it doesn't generate many hits for Heather Mills.

You brought up the K-fed issue, not me. I'm simply pointing out that there is an awful lot of vitriol spewed at him as well, and that you can't just sweep it off the table as a gender issue.

 

[koobcamuk]

Fair percentage? Define that.

That's what I think.

If I marry a millionaire, their money is not half mine. It doesn't make sense.

Because a high court divorce judge has said so, someone far more qualified to rule on this case than you or I.

Isn't the high court judge just another person? It's all opinion. I wonder what a jury made up from most of the people I've talked to about this would say. It's not fair in any way at all that she gets millions. She didn't earn it. Unless this counts towards her being a "high class prostitute"?

This case has nothing to do with gender.

If I married that ugly woman on 'dragon's den' (because I loved her for her personality) and we split up, I wouldn't want her money. I wouldn't deserve it even if I did want it. Whatever my cause may be.

 

[Iscariot]

Unless this counts towards her being a "high class prostitute"?

Wasn't she in only one or two adult photoshoots? Twenty years ago? I don't think it's at all fair to call her a prostitute.

 

[koobcamuk]

Wasn't she in only one or two adult photoshoots? Twenty years ago? I don't think it's at all fair to call her a prostitute.

I wasn't referring to that. Read the second paragraph of this Wikipedia entry to better understand why I said that.

Either way, she hasn't earnt the money she's taken from Paul Mc. I don't even like Paul Mc. I just don't like her more.

 

[Iscariot]

I wasn't referring to that. Read the second paragraph of this Wikipedia entry to better understand why I said that.

Either way, she hasn't earnt the money she's taken from Paul Mc. I don't even like Paul Mc. I just don't like her more.

That's unsubstantiated. I may not agree with the divorce settlement, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, especially given the source.

 

[koobcamuk]

That's unsubstantiated. I may not agree with the divorce settlement, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, especially given the source.

I don't think she used to do that either.

What I do think though, is that she can be linked to that in my mind if she ended up being paid for literally not earning a penny. Not earning because he already had the money. She went in poor and came out rich. Nicely done Mills.

 

[millar876]

one question though, if she was as happy with the tettlement as she said she was, Why oh why did she slowly pour a jug of water over paul's lawyers head saying "well, justice has been done!" how is that not the markings of a crazy person.

Quotes from the divorce ruling...
"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".
"Overall she was a less than impressive witness,"
"I have to say I cannot accept the wife's case that she was wealthy and independent by the time she met the husband in the middle of 1999,"

bbc report

Full court judgment

needless to say it looks a bit damning to Ms Mills and I for one can see why she didn't want it out in the open, i can imagine the harm it will do to her rep in the USA where she seems to be liked A LOT more than the uk.