Judge: Heather Mills is a big fat liar

[heathersharon]

I only wish they hadn't made public the SPECIFICS of Paul's security. I worry about Paulie's safety with John's murder and George's attack.

[bychance]

Good

[Chimera]

"Heather Mills is a big fat liar", and she still got 50 million dollars - makes me crazy!

[Morticia]

Thanks for the info NNR, a very interesting read. All of her lying and scheming was bound to come out one way or another, it always does. Especially when it seems to be a constant in her life. And what happend about her recordings of Paul being abusive? Was that mentioned at all NNR?

[NoNoRehab]

Morticia, the judge mentions her accusations in the context of dismissing them. No tapes or recordings were apparently produced, just her allegations. He also mentions Paul's allegations. Apparently Heather has a libel case going with the tabloids at the moment because the tabs claim to have proof that Heather is the one who leaked her petition with all the abuse stuff. The judge was going to hear about it with affidavits from both sides but at the last minute the lawyers agreed to leave it be. The judge writes that Paul's lawyers wanted to go forward on the conduct issue and give evidence, but the judge eventually dismissed all issues of conduct on either side as long as Heather doesn't try and trot out the "Paul was abusive" stuff in the libel trial, as Paul is not a party to that suit, and so it would be unfair for him to drop his chance at rebutting the allegations now only to have them pop up in a case where he can't rebut them because he's not involved in the case. After assurances that that wouldn't happen Paul's lawyers agreed with the judge to drop the conduct issue although the judge quotes Paul's lawyer and describes the convincing it took (Heather's side immediately agreed to forget about the abuse allegations as long as Paul's side would not pursue their allegations about her conduct).

These were the counter-allegations Paul was going to file but which caused Heather's lawyers to basically drop their allegations:

On 25 October 2006 the husband in the ancillary relief proceedings issued an application for the case to be listed before a High Court Judge for directions as to the future disposal of the suit. If the cause was to be defended, the husband sought leave to amend his Petition and to file a Supplemental Petition. The proposed Amended Petition alleged a number of matters against the wife of verbal abuse, extreme jealousy, false accusations of violence, and that throughout the marriage the wife had shown a consistent inability to tell the truth. The Supplemental Petition alleged, inter alia, leaking the husband’s private phone calls include one with Stella, leaking of the husband’s Petition and that the wife had leaked the Answer and Cross-Petition.

The judge noted that, "she was happy to leave conduct out completely if the husband too would leave it out."

[NoNoRehab]

This was one of the best bits, BTW, her attempt to basically defraud her husband of a bunch of $$$. MPL is the name of Paul's company and I bet Paul gives his financial director, Mr Winn, a big fat bonus. He's probably ecstatic he hired this guy:

139. On 2 November 2005 the wife e-mailed Mr Paul Winn, MPL's finance director, in respect of the property at Thames Reach that "the amount outstanding on the mortgage is £480,000" and "please pay it in the following account and I will deal with the closure of it". The account was a NatWest bank account in the name of the wife. On 5 November the wife e-mailed Mr Winn that "there are 4 loans with different companies on the property totalling £480,000 …". Mr Winn pressed for full details on each loan. In February 2006 the wife again e-mailed Mr Winn about the loans and on 28 February instructed him to pay £450,000 into her account "so that I can settle this situation". On 1 March Mr Winn told the wife in an e-mail that he would not pay any sum "without proof that the loans exist or some protection secured on the property at Thames Reach".

140. In her Replies to Questionnaire dated 6 February 2007, in response to a question to annotate the wife's bank accounts showing discharge of the 4 loans and indicating the recipient of each payment, it was said "the wife did not have any loans".

141. The wife in her cross-examination accepted that Thames Reach was bought mortgage free and never had a mortgage on it. But she said that at the time of the e-mails referred to above she believed that there were loans secured on the property.

142. Mr Mostyn put to her that that was a fraudulent attempt to extract money from the husband.

143. In my judgment it is unnecessary to go so far as to characterise what the wife attempted as fraudulent. However, it is not an episode that does her any credit whatsoever. Either she knew or must have known that there were no loans on Thames Reach, yet she tried to suggest that there were and thereby obtain monies by underhand means.

144. Her attempts when cross-examined to suggest that she may have got in a muddle and confused this property with others, to my mind, had a hollow ring. In the light of the husband's generosity towards her, as I have set out, I find the wife's behaviour distinctly distasteful. In any event, as Mr Mostyn rightly submitted, it damages her overall credibility.

[aabbcc]

Her overwhelming greed is truly despicable. She really doesn't deserve anything. She is beyond disgusting.

Get a fucking job already and make your own damn money, if it's that important to you.

[Honey]

I hope she gives the money to a few worthy charities, but I won't be holding my breath!

Paul should have got a pre-nup! *Runs away from aabbcc before she slaps me*

[AgentOrange]

[penname]

I don't like the woman, but it must be awful to be her. Not just because of the lynch-mob hatred, but because inside her head must be chaos. There seems to be nothing to keep her grounded - not the truth, not the law, not family, nothing.

Nonorehab, what was the part in the judgement that related to Paul defending her a bit?

[mistify]

I just really hate this gold digging cow.. I think she is just a horrible human being or just friggin nuts.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by penname

I don't like the woman, but it must be awful to be her. Not just because of the lynch-mob hatred, but because inside her head must be chaos. There seems to be nothing to keep her grounded - not the truth, not the law, not family, nothing.

Nonorehab, what was the part in the judgement that related to Paul defending her a bit?

Yeah she's cryin' all the way to the bank - boo hoo!

[NoNoRehab]

It was funny because she asked for a fulltime personal trainer and the judge was like, No, no one needs that. You can live with part-time.

[Novice]

Is that to get around the gag order?

[Novice]

Wow! You'd have thought that she was used to a gag & bondage from her days as a whore.... tut....