|
Joey |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080317/people_nm/mccartney_dc
" LONDON (Reuters) - Former Beatle Paul McCartney was ordered on Monday to pay his estranged wife Heather Mills 24.3 million pounds ($48.7 million) after an acrimonious divorce battle.
" McCartney, 65, married the former model and charity campaigner Mills, 40, in 2002 but they split four years later, blaming media intrusion into their private lives. They have a daughter, Beatrice, aged four.
Speaking outside the court, Mills criticized McCartney's lawyer, accusing her of handling the case badly and of calling her names.
"I am so glad it is over," she added. "We are very, very pleased."
The split was fought out under a remorseless media spotlight with McCartney, a founder of the world's most famous pop group, pitted against the outspoken Mills, target of lurid tales in the press about her colorful past.
She hit back, saying she had been driven to the brink of suicide because the media had branded her a "whore" and a "gold-digger."
Why ?!
WHY ?!
|
|
gotdablouse |
Dunno if it's bad or good for Macca, he should have known better anyway. |
|
nankerphelge |
That's great news.
Now maybe she can spring for one of them bionic legs...
 |
|
mojoman |
did you realize heather was a hooker? |
|
Ten Thousand Motels |
quote: mojoman wrote:
did you realize heather was a hooker?
High End too boot.
|
|
EELPIE |
 |
|
EELPIE |
quote: mojoman wrote:
did you realize heather was a hooker?
 |
|
Lavendar |
A sweet Price for Piece.
Glad to finally hear "the Price is Right"
Now what?
Theres always a winner. |
|
Joey |
quote: mojoman wrote:
did you realize heather was a hooker?
mojo .......................
I had no idea Heather was a Hooker .
No IDEA !!!!!
Why ?! .... WHY ?!
" Hit Me Ronnie ! "
'kins |
|
Joey |
quote: nankerphelge wrote:
That's great news.
Now maybe she can spring for one of them bionic legs...

Nanky ...........................
You are on FIRE !!!!!!!!
'kins , Est. 1999 and loved by everybody .
|
|
caro |
I don't understand why someone would need 24 million pounds to live a decent life after a divorce. I can see why she would ask for that sum (I would too), but why do they actually give it to her?
Anyway. In fact I just wanted to say that Nanky's endless fascination with Heather's leg is one of the reasons why I keep coming back to this wonderful board. |
|
Ten Thousand Motels |
quote: caro wrote:
I don't understand why someone would need 24 million pounds to live a decent life after a divorce.
For the children. |
|
Joey |
quote: Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
For the children.
Yes TTM ..................
We ' do it for the kids ' !!!!!
Always ...... The Kids !
J. |
|
nankerphelge |
I can't explain my fascination with it, Caro.
I'm stumped!!!
 |
|
Joey |
quote: nankerphelge wrote:
I can't explain my fascination with it, Caro.
I'm stumped!!!

Nanky ?!

|
|
Joey |
N- Nanky ?!

|
|
lotsajizz |
Paul should appeal...that tart deserves a million, no more |
|
EELPIE |
quote: Joey wrote:
mojo .......................
I had no idea Heather was a Hooker .
No IDEA !!!!!
Why ?! .... WHY ?!
" Hit Me Ronnie ! "
'kins
 |
|
Sioux |
That's a lot of moolah for that, uh, woman. On the other hand, Beatrice is only getting $75,000 a year, although Paul is paying for her nanny and schooling. I had heard earlier this week that she was getting 50 million POUNDS. So, this is about half that....
Heather was a hooker??? I had NO idea....lol |
|
mojoman |
spitzers been totally outspent by big mac. emperors club? heidi fleiss? rookies compared to heather....... |
|
Honky Tonk Man |
Its more than the money-grabbing hoare deserves. Macca should of given her just enough to give her a little luxury and to support their daughter.
£25 million? For what?? |
|
Joey |
" £25 million? For what?? "

|
|
nankerphelge |

"I pray to god Joey takes my leg and does lewd things to me with it" |
|
Prodigal Son |
quote: EELPIE wrote:

My dad refers to Heather with a line my grandpa used to use about women he didn't like:
"She's got a cheap mouth!"
Besides the sexual innuendo, it could also refer to a woman with a ghastly set of dentures, an ugly mouth or one that doesn't know when to shut up. In Heather's case, all possible interpretations apply. |
|
Sioux |
Well, I'm sure Paul wishes she would shut up. I do too. |
|
Alfthebeardyviking |
quote: Sioux wrote:
Well, I'm sure Paul wishes she would shut up. I do too.
All the facts will come out after the apeal.She was awarded $49m toady for four years of a failed marrage. Not content with this she's gone on a mad rant and demanded an apeal as and I quote her "The judge stipulated Paul was worth $800m when everyone who knows Paul is aware he's worth $1600m".
Fuck a duck. This is a bird who climbed her way out of Newcastle on the bootstrings of sucessfull men, became a soft porn actress and titty glamour model.
Widowed McCartney married her without a pre-nup and 'vola', ker ching for Mills.
The court papers will become public domain shortly. Watch this space. Plus she threw a jug of court water over MCartneys lawyer during proceedings yesterday. The woman is just vile.
|
|
nanatod |
I think this is a clear victory for McCartney and his legal team.
Wasn't Mills intially asking the court for 250 million pounds? If so, she only got 25% of what she sought, and 1/32nd of what he's alleged worth.
|
|
Joey |
quote: Alfthebeardyviking wrote:
"The judge stipulated Paul was worth $800m when everyone who knows Paul is aware he's worth $1600m".
This is a bird who climbed her way out of Newcastle on the bootstrings of sucessfull men, became a soft porn actress and titty glamour model.
Amen Beardy ........................
AMEN !!!!
J. Flykins |
|
polytoxic |
This has actually made me feel sorry for Paul McCartney.
I'm through the looking glass, people.
Heather Mills is a narcissistic freakshow.
|
|
Joey |
quote: polytoxic wrote:
This has actually made me feel sorry for Paul McCartney.
I'm through the looking glass, people.
Heather Mills is a narcissistic freakshow.
polytoxic ............................
Why was Heather a Hooker ?!
WHY ?! ... WHY ?!
WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?! WHY ?! ... WHY ?!
....why ?!
|