Oh dear...Paul McCartney AGREES to pay Heather Mills £55m

[Chimera]

Except there aren't any prenups in England, correct?

Apparently, wrong. I read in the Telegraph that more people should get them and they were discussing the McCartney case.

[NoNoRehab]

Oh yeah, that magical tape she's been talking about for a year and yet somehow no one other than her has ever heard or seen it, including her own freaking lawyers? Because it's not like Heather is a famewhore or anything. She'll talk about it, sure, but actually like....producing it, even at the one time it would actually help it, that's just beyond her capacity.

BTW does anyone remember when she claimed he hit her? She dropped that pretty quick in favor of that magical, "Er, I mean he hit Linda and I have a tape of it" story. Funnily enough she bothered to go on a TV tour to scream and cry about how people don't believe but the one thing that actually WOULD prove her not a liar she can't manage to produce.

It cracks me up that in literally the same interviews she goes on about what a drunken, worthless bastard he is then in the same interview will say, "Oh no, he's a wonderful father." Because certainly there's no contradiction in claiming that your ex is horrible drunk who made your life miserable and so you deserve an enormous amount of his money, yet on the other hand you're quite content to let him have the kid (who Heather after all is insisting needs two nannies and boarding school in order, I guess so that Heather sees her as little as possible).

[aabbcc]

Apparently, wrong. I read in the Telegraph that more people should get them and they were discussing the McCartney case.

A while back, I posted an article on prenups in the UK from a UK legal site. There are currently no established laws regarding these agreements. A person can have one, but it doesn't carry much weight because, until a law regarding prenups is set in place, they aren't considered viable legal documents. You can enter one during a divorce trial if you want, but ultimately it is entirely up to the judge's discretion.

Obviously, being as careful with his money as he is and having a topnotch legal team to boot, a wealthy man like Paul would definitely have had some sort of agreement drawn up if it would have served to protect his assets in the long run.

[Rogue]

A while back, I posted an article on prenups in the UK from a UK legal site. There are currently no established laws regarding these agreements. A person can have one, but it doesn't carry much weight because, until a law regarding prenups is set in place, they aren't considered viable legal documents. You can enter one during a divorce trial if you want, but ultimately it is entirely up to the judge's discretion.

Obviously, being as careful with his money as he is and having a topnotch legal team to boot, a wealthy man like Paul would definitely have had some sort of agreement drawn up if it would have served to protect his assets in the long run.

Prenups are not legally enforceable documents in and of themselves as say, a contract is. The current law resolves around an equitable solution, and the intentions of the parties prior to the marriage is only one of several factors the courts will look at, which includes the ongoing needs of the parties, the needs of the children, and the reasonable expectation of the parties prior to any split. The woman who won a £48m settlement did so on the basis that there was no document evidencing intentions prior to their marriage, and that she had reasonably believed she would live in comparative luxury for the rest of her life...until her hubbie went and screwed some bimbo and left the wife for her.

Arguments have gone back and forth between Parliament and the Courts because Prenups are no more than persuasive evidence of a prior intention, and in this case especially, no Court would have imposed a prenup of say, Heather walking away with nothing, when you evaluate her ongoing needs with Beatrice and her reasonable expectations when she married Paul. This case has opened the prenup can of worms again and increased their profile but frankly they currently serve nothing more than evidence of intentions, and would not stand up against a schedule of the income and outgoings of whichever parent retained primary custody of the children, or a spouse with minimal or no income compared to the expenditure they established with their spouse as a reasonable expectation of standard of living.

Long winded, sorry

[aabbcc]

... no Court would have imposed a prenup of say, Heather walking away with nothing, when you evaluate her ongoing needs with Beatrice and her reasonable expectations when she married Paul.

I think her intention all along was to marry him and then ditch him and walk away with a huge pile of cash she doesn't deserve nor have any right to. Beatrice was the icing on the cake, ensuring her a steady supply of free money until the child turns eighteen. I'd like to see Paul go for custody. At least then, Bea would be at home and have family around her. Ho-ther just wants to stick her in a boarding school as fast as she possibly can.

[NoNoRehab]

I love her demand for TWO full-time nannies. Let's break it down:

1. HEATHER HAS NO JOB.
2. She is also demanding a full-time household staff.
3. There's one kid, who is school age and so not even there during the day, possibly more because Heather wants to send her to BOARDING SCHOOL.

And yet Heather needs TWO full-time nannies working at the same time to deal? Holy Christ.

[LynnieD]

Or he could have just gotten a prenup, the jackass. He should have listened to Howard Stern.

Absolutely. Everyone should listen to Howard, dude knows his shit.

This will learn Macca..guaranteed he won't be making this idiotic mistake again. I love him, but he's a total dumb ass.

[A*O]

I love her demand for TWO full-time nannies. Let's break it down:

1. HEATHER HAS NO JOB.
2. She is also demanding a full-time household staff.
3. There's one kid, who is school age and so not even there during the day, possibly more because Heather wants to send her to BOARDING SCHOOL.

And yet Heather needs TWO full-time nannies working at the same time to deal? Holy Christ.

Oh but she does - remember all her work for CHARITEEEEE

[Eli]

Oh, I love Cojo! He's like the Allison Janney of the reserved gay community! Actually he's more like Geena Davis. I'm going to say both.

McCartney AND Mills are both scrags who earn way more than they're worth to be honest. So fuck them both.

[sparkly]

I hope she blows right through that money and ends up completely broke.

[A*O]

Or better yet - give $50 mill to her chariteees and keep the rest as her subsistance income. Yeah right.

[NoNoRehab]

Indeed let's see how money she gives to charity, Miss I'm So Broke.

[cool girl]

As part of the deal, which was predicted in the Daily Mail last week, Miss Mills has agreed to be bound by a confidentiality order which means she will never be able to speak publicly or write in detail about the breakdown of the four-year marriage.

I hope now she goes away...i feel sorry for Beatrice. I can't stand H.Mills she is nothing but a complete fantasist and a compulsive liar. Paul should never have married her. So many people warned him about her b4 they married.

Anyway i hope she doesn't get that much money. But it looks like - whatever the amount - she will walk away with a considerable sum.

[Novice]

I thought that the gag order was not necessarily to stop her talking about what did happen in the marriage but to stop her talking about it at all - she has, regularly, been proved to be a constant liar - it's like a reflex to her...

At the end of the day, the kid is currently too young to really understand what's going on in the press, but when she's older? Who wants to hear what really happened/what happened in Heather's mind?
I'm pretty sure she took of her leg & beat him with it... the only shocking bit would be how much he enjoyed it.

But I do just want them to go away!!!!


Rogue - long winded? Not really. Clear? Definately! You didn't mention that we don't have this "community property" thing either.