Uncharitable Heather Mills branded a liar by judge
"Heather Mills' evidence in her divorce case with Sir Paul McCartney was "inconsistent, inaccurate" and "less than candid", according to the judge".
On the other hand...
"Sir Paul's evidence was described as "balanced".
"He expressed himself moderately though at times with justifiable irritation, if not anger. He was consistent, accurate and honest," Mr Justice Bennett said".
McCartney-Mills judgment in full here.
UPDATE:
Evidence that Heather Mills is a gold digger has emerged from the court judgment...
"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. Her problem stems from the lack of any documentary evidence to support her case as to the level of her earnings".
"During her cross-examination she asserted for the first time that in addition to property assets she had £2m-£3m in the bank. No mention of such assets was made in her affidavit. There is no documentary evidence to support that assertion. During the hearing she was asked repeatedly to produce bank statements, which she said she thought she had in Brighton, to verify this claim. No bank statements were ever produced".
"In her evidence she told me that as much as 80% or 90% of her earnings went direct to charities. However, the wife had to accept in her cross-examination that there was no documentary evidence, for example letters from the relevant charities, that her fees were sent direct to charities".
"In her Answers to a Questionnaire of 6 February 2007 the wife, having been asked to set out in a schedule the income earned by her and sent direct to charities for the years 1997 and 2000 inclusive, replied that she did not have the records requested to enable her to complete a schedule. Furthermore, her assertion that she gave away to charity 80% to 90% of her earned income is inconsistent with having £2m-£3m in the bank in 1999".
"The wife accepted that had she had £2m to £3m in the bank in 1999 she is most likely to have put such a sum into an account earning interest. But the tax returns do not disclose any bank interest earned or only very small sums which are not consistent with holding £2m-£3m in a bank or banks. Moreover her tax returns disclose no charitable giving at all".
Heather Mills' contribution to Paul McCartney marriage: an acrylic fingernail
Poor Paul - the allure of the younger woman always blinds one, unless one strikes lucky of course [chuckle].
ReplyDeleteOne fateful night when he was legless!
ReplyDeleteGosh, a shame she can't be burned at ths stake, eh, John. Filthy one-legged, lying slapper.
ReplyDeleteListen, you stupid prick, Lord McCartney married a woman young enough to be his daughter and with her fathered a child to whom he, at sixty-odd, could be the great-grandfather, you fucking moron. Of course it was going to go sour. McCartney has the benefit of a lifetime of wealth, travel and experience, is one of the most popular entertainers in history, adored by billions and still he fucked up. He asked her to marry him. He's the culprit, not this half-baked, disabled fuckwit. You jailhouse women-haters really are revolting. "Branded a liar by Judge" Wow, she's in good company there, then. What a shame she's not a man, she'd be one of your heroes then.