Anna Nicole Smith's wedding photos jeopardise court claim

[MaryJane]

ANNA NICOLE SMITH's battle for a share of her late husband's fortune is facing more trouble - thanks to the discovery of an unseen batch of her wedding day photographs.

The busty blonde was 26 when she exchanged nuptials with wheelchair-bound J HOWARD MARSHALL II in 1994 - just 14 months before the oil tycoon died aged 90, leaving her to battle it out with his son E PIERCE MARSHALL for her $88.6 million (£49.2 million) payout.

But now the younger Marshall claims Smith entered into the marriage for financial gain have started to swirl again, thanks to a set of pictures showing her looking miserable on her wedding day and during her honeymoon in Bali.
The rare photographs were in the home of Smith's aunt and uncle, ELAINE and MELVIN TABERS, a Texas nurse and a pipe fitter respectively.

Melvin says, "She was out for every cent she could get. I'm sure she cared for him, but it was not love, in my book."

Also recently discovered by Smith's estranged relatives was a Christmas 1992 videotape of Howard Marshall bequeathing specific items to the former Playboy Playmate.

Elaine adds, "(Howard Marshall) wanted (Anna Nicole) to keep the house, the cars, the jewellery and all the other gifts he had bought her. But he never said anything about his fortune.

"After we got to know him, he often said he didn't want the stock touched. He wanted to make sure (Anna Nicole) was taken care of when he was gone, but he was adamant he didn't want to split up his family's inheritance...

"When we played the tape, our jaws dropped. This is Howard talking from beyond the grave, a verbal will that says how he wants his fortune divided.

This will probably become the evidence that will deny (Anna Nicole) the millions."

Smith's battle for the $88.6 million initially awarded to her in 2002 is expected to go to court in January (06), with a decision coming before the court term ends in June (06).

From femalefirst.co.uk

[darksithbunny]

I saw the tape. He was specific in what he wanted her to have. He was a lawyer for God's sake! He said he would take care of her whilst he was living. Nothing about her after his demise. He didn't change his will. It all is left to his son. Can't get any plainer than that.

Iam just SO PISSED OFF that our TAX MONEY is helping this trashy bitch by taking this case to the Supreme Court. Only thing I can think is the court is just really bored.

[Lobelia]

He was specific in what he wanted her to have. He was a lawyer for God's sake! He said he would take care of her whilst he was living. Nothing about her after his demise. He didn't change his will. It all is left to his son. Can't get any plainer than that.

Exactly. This is not a man prone to leaving loose ends. If he wanted her to have the money, he would have set it up that way.

[MillionDollarBaby]

I really don't know much about this but why did he marry her then? He didn't have to marry her. He entered into a legal contract with her, that must mean something.