5.14pm
28 March 2014
10.11am
10 March 2017
I wouldn’t. Yoko and John loved each other and genuinely cared about each other where on the other hand, Heather took advantage of Paul, I don’t know exactly what she did but I think she married him for the money and she seems to be infatuated with greed. Paul is a very nice loving and caring man and he let this girl into his life only for her to ruin it, here’s something from Wikipedia:
Wikipedia says
After dismissing Anthony Julius, a Mishcon de Reya lawyer, Mills stated she would represent herself in the upcoming divorce hearing,[77] with help from her sister Fiona, David Rosen (a solicitor-advocate), and Michael Shilub, an American attorney.[78] In leaked documents, Mills complained that McCartney was often drunk, smoked cannabis, stabbed her with a broken wine glass, pushed her over a table, and pushed her into a bathtub when she was pregnant.[79] Referring to her part in the marriage, Mills said that she had been a full-time wife, mother, lover, confidante, business partner and psychologist to McCartney.[80] McCartney’s lawyers studied Mills’ book: Life Balance: The Essential Keys to a Lifetime of Wellbeing (published on 25 May 2006), as it contradicted many of her claims, such as when she praised McCartney for “Bringing me breakfast in bed every morning, no matter how he feels, and I do the dinner, so we’ve got that agreement. It’s thoughtfulness”.[81] Mills’ father reconciled with his daughter after meeting her and McCartney, when they introduced him to his granddaughter, Beatrice. After their separation, he said that it “took guts to represent yourself at the High Court”, and that he was proud of his daughter, even though he thought she would be “torn to shreds” by McCartney’s lawyers.[82]The case was heard in court 34 at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.[83] At the start of the proceedings Mills asked for £125 million, but McCartney offered £15.8 million.[84] Before the court case, Mills had employed the accountancy firm Lee and Allen to examine McCartney’s publishing company, business assets and properties, claiming that she had a tape recording of McCartney admitting his true worth, but the presiding judge, Mr Justice Bennett, based his decision on a forensic valuation of McCartney’s finances completed by accounting firm Ernst & Young.[85]
The hearing took six days, finishing on 18 February 2008, with the judgment being made public on 17 March 2008.[18] Mills was eventually awarded a lump sum of £16.5m, together with assets of £7.8m, which included the properties she owned at the time.[86] The total was £24.3 million (nearly $50 million in US currency[87]), plus payments of £35,000 per annum, for a nanny and school costs for their daughter.[88] In his judgment, Justice Bennett stated: “The husband’s evidence was, in my judgment, balanced. He expressed himself moderately though at times with justifiable irritation, if not anger. He was consistent, accurate and honest. But I regret to have to say I cannot say the same about the wife’s evidence. Having watched and listened to her give evidence, having studied the documents, and having given in her favour every allowance for the enormous strain she must have been under (and in conducting her own case) I am driven to the conclusion that much of her evidence, both written and oral, was not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid. Overall, she was a less than impressive witness.”[18] Regarding her career, the judge said: “I find that, far from the husband dictating to and restricting the wife’s career and charitable activities, he did the exact opposite. He encouraged it and lent his support, name and reputation to her business and charitable activities. The facts as I find them do not in any way support her claim.”[89] In anger at the judgment, Mills threw a pitcher of water on the head of Fiona Shackleton, McCartney’s solicitor, in the courtroom. [90]
The divorce was granted on 12 May 2008, and the preliminary divorce decree was finalised six weeks later.[91][92]
During their marriage she was known as Heather Mills McCartney, but after her divorce she reverted to Heather Mills, although she should still be correctly referred to as Lady McCartney; as the former wife of a knight, she technically retains that title.[93] She was addressed as such by Lord Justice Leveson, during the Leveson Inquiry.[94]
I genuinely feel bad that Paul had to give anything to Heather, I would’ve made that peg leg live in a dumpster for taking advantage of such a nice man. First of all, her claims are clearly false, this is Paul McCartney , not Ozzy Osbourne, Paul wouldn’t dare stab his wife with a broken wine glass or throw a pregnant woman into a bathtub, how stupid did she think the judge was, Linda has never complained about Paul abusing her, nor Jane. Also, if Paul threw Heather into the bathtub while she was pregnant, Beatrice would’ve been born with problems.
I should know. When I was 6, I hit my mother in the stomach while she was pregnant with my brother, which made him mentally retarded (not bad enough where he can’t talk or isn’t potty trained, but bad enough where he was given actually given this diagnosis by a doctor or whoever diagnoses people with disabilities), my mother blames vaccines but I blame myself. That was from a 6 year old, Paul is a fully grown man so the fact that Beatrice is perfectly fine proves to me that Heather was lying.
Also, Paul goes on to state that no matter how pissed off he was, he always made Heather breakfast in bed, doesn’t sound abusive to me at all.
Heather reminds me of a person named Anita Sarkeesian, both of them will stretch the truth or even lie to make themselves look good and make the people of whom they hate look bad. In Heather’s case, it’s Paul, in Anita’s case, it’s video games. For example, Anita claims that Mario saving Princess Peach is sexist when in reality it’s not.
Finally, Paul’s children from Linda all seem to hate Heather.
In conclusion, John and Yoko loved each other whereas Paul and Heather was a big mistake.
The following people thank Dark Overlord for this post:
sir walter raleigh, Von Bontee, Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
2.54pm
26 January 2017
I agree. A long a prosperous marraige with Linda wouldn’t be possible for a raging and abusive alcoholic. The inconsistencies are very apparent between how Mills describes Paul and how everybody else ever describes him. Plus, the case was clearly about money for her, whereas Paul was probably just trying to get that bat s**t crazy woman out of his life.
Also, I have no problem defining her by her disability. Its not a huge deal for me seeing as she hasnt earned an ounce of my respect.
But maybe we could define her by some of her other traits, like “The greedy one” or “the gold digging one” or “the manipulative one” or “the lying one” or “the worst” or “the scourge.”
ok that’s enough
The following people thank sir walter raleigh for this post:
Dark Overlord, Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, William Shears Campbell"The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles!"
-Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
"We could ride and surf together while our love would grow"
-Brian Wilson, Surfer Girl
3.58pm
10 March 2017
To be honest, I would just call her Heather but if someone wants to call her one legged or amputee, I’m fine with it. I agree that it seems stupid to make it seem like Paul was abusive to Heather despite the fact that he never was abusive to Linda. Can we change the title of this thread to Paul’s wives because we’ve talked more about Heather in this thread than Nancy or Linda.
Also, why did they give Heather any settlement at all, I would’ve gave her nothing. What especially pisses me off is why did they let Heather have custody over Beatrice. Sure Paul has just as much custody over her but shouldn’t he have all of the custody. If I were Beatrice, I’d much rather be with my father who is a rich yet loving and caring person who sang and played many instruments (most notably guitar, bass, and piano) in The Beatles then my mother who is some jerk off amputee who took advantage of her disability and married my father just for the wealth and then lied and claimed that he was abusive, why should Heather have any custody over her daughter Beatrice. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if Beatrice hated her mother.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
Little Piggy Dragonguy said
But you are demeaning disabled people with the words you use to refer to Heather Mills. If you were attacking her for using her disability to get attention, you would call her “manipulative”, or “equivocal”. Instead of defining her by the personality traits you perceive she has, you define her by her disability. Although it’s not your intention, calling her “one-legged” in contempt shows disdain for all people with such a disability.
I have to agree with this. Everyone, please stop the demeaning and offensive name-calling. Criticise Heather Mills for her actions by all means, but reductive insults based on anyone’s disabilities or physical appearance aren’t welcome. Be better than that.
Dark Overlord said
Also, the term one legged is tame compared to more offensive terms that he could’ve just as easily called her like bitch or whore. Also, what Ron is trying to say is that because she takes advantage of her disability, she should be referred to as such.For example, If I knew someone who had cerebral palsy who pissed me off because he regularly cut in line and said it was because he had a disability, I would call him crippled and feel fine about doing so because he was taking advantage of his disability and also because he was being a total jerk so it’s only fair.
Wow, you seem like a deeply unpleasant person. And while I have no problem calling you out on your noxious personality, I wouldn’t bring in your physical appearance because it’s not relevant to anything. Neither is Heather Mills’s. What you both have in common is the potential to change and improve your character, but it’s a tad harder to, say, grow a leg back or cure cerebral palsy. As the saying goes, play the ball not the man.
Ron Nasty said
I admit the way I refer to is harsh. However, she has often used her disability both publicly and privately. Look at the disgusting accusations she made about Paul during their divorce, many of them based around her disability.I am not attacking disabled people, or her because she is disabled, but drawing attention to the way she has used her disability to garner publicity while protesting some form of discrimination and persecution because of her disability when things don’t go her way. I am criticising for a personality trait.
See, it really doesn’t come across like that. It feels more like a cheap shot coupled with a revisionist excuse. It’s a little like certain Beatles memoirs that refer to Yoko Ono as “the Japanese one” or the “Princess of Darkness”. It’s really unnecessary to bring playground insults into an adult discussion, and doesn’t reflect well on whoever’s doing it.
@Little Piggy Dragonguy @Heath We’ll do our best to stop it happening again. It’s not how I want this forum to be.
@meanmistermustard @Ahhh Girl @Zig
The following people thank Joe for this post:
Zig, meanmistermustard, moriz, WeepingAtlasCedarsCan buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
8.34am
10 March 2017
Joe said
Wow, you seem like a deeply unpleasant person. And while I have no problem calling you out on your noxious personality, I wouldn’t bring in your physical appearance because it’s not relevant to anything. Neither is Heather Mills’s. What you both have in common is the potential to change and improve your character, but it’s a tad harder to, say, grow a leg back or cure cerebral palsy. As the saying goes, play the ball not the man.
To be fair, I do have anger issues and get pissed off really easily, so I’m not always the most pleasant person to be around and suffering from depression doesn’t help those problems at all. To be fair, I would prefer to call her Heather over one legged myself and when I used the words bitch and whore in my example, I was stating that it’s just as easy to call her that, not that it would be just as acceptable.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
3.19pm
5 June 2017
To take this topic back on track…
Paul’s relationship with Nancy is different from Paul’s relationship with Linda. As someone mentioned, Linda came at the right time in Paul’s life when the Beatles were at the beginning of the end and she was there through all the court squabbles. Paul was very depressed with the whole situation and she had a large role in helping him out of it. He was at a very insecure and unsure place at that time, and Linda was able to provide Paul the security and stability he craved. Paul’s relationship with Nancy was, I believe, a huge breath of fresh air after what Heather Mills put him through. At that time in his life, he was already in a secure place and had everything going for him. All he wished for was a loving partner which came in the form of Nancy. These two relationships formed due to different circumstances, but I bet Paul loved Linda/loves Nancy equally.
Also I just want to point out that I really love that Nancy is not at all insecure by the love Paul had/has for Linda. Paul mentioned in a recent article that Nancy was intimidated by Linda’s legacy in the beginning of their relationship, she event went on to tell Paul that she’s a lousy cook haha! But she’s almost always with him at any Linda dedication event, and I’m sure she doesn’t mind at all that he sings Maybe I’m Amazed for Linda every night during the tours. It’s something I respect her for because I imagine Heather wasn’t like that, and many other people might get jealous by that too. I think it’s one quality Paul admires in Nancy as well and shows she’s here for the right reasons. I also love how she’s so openly affectionate with Paul. In short, Nancy rocks and I’m so glad Paul has found her in his later years of life.
The following people thank Rachel for this post:
sir walter raleigh, Ahhh Girl, GardeningOctopus, The Hole Got Fixed, moriz, WeepingAtlasCedars, Joe10.50pm
15 May 2015
Yes Rachel, it does seem like Nancy is different from Heather in that regard (I recall reading how Heather held on to that jealous insecurity through the marriage). That may be the most important factor, though the other ones you describe are important too.
The following people thank Pineapple Records for this post:
RachelA ginger sling with a pineapple heart,
a coffee dessert, yes you know it's good news...
11.35pm
15 May 2015
Dark Overlord (3 June 2017 10.11am) quotes Wikipedia on the divorce trial, and in that quote I find:
In anger at the judgment, Mills threw a pitcher of water on the head of Fiona Shackleton, McCartney’s solicitor, in the courtroom. [90]
Over the years when I’ve consulted Wikipedia, or checked up on its footnotes, I often find more or less subtle problems.
At random, I checked footnote 90 from Dark Overlord’s quote: The footnote leads to a Guardian story on the divorce trial, where at one point it says:
Mills also confirmed reports that she had poured water on Sir Paul’s lawyer, Fiona Shackleton. Mills said she approached the lawyer and said: “I’m not a loser” before tipping the water jug over her.
“I poured the whole jug of water on her head. I was very calm”, she said.
Note how Wikipedia got two facts wrong (we’ll forgive them for substituting “pitcher” for “jug”): 1) that Heather “threw” it at Paul’s lawyer; and 2) that she did it in hot anger (it may well have been anger, but a calm, seething anger, apparently). Most people don’t take the time to check up on Wikipedia’s tissue of factoids woven in amongst facts. It can be a fun game to play, picking a Wikipedia footnote at random and seeing if it holds up water. I just did it seconds ago:
The claim in a Wikipedia article on the reception of Monty Python’s movie Life of Brian:
Shortly after the film was released, Cleese and Palin engaged in debate on the BBC2 discussion programme Friday Night, Saturday Morning with Malcolm Muggeridge and Mervyn Stockwood, the Bishop of Southwark, who put forward arguments against the film. Muggeridge and the Bishop, it was later claimed, had arrived 15 minutes late to see a screening of the picture prior to the debate, missing the establishing scenes demonstrating that Brian and Jesus were two different characters, and hence contended that it was a send-up of Christ himself.[10]
Actually, that paragraph is a bundle of claims; the one I focus on is that, before the debate with the Pythons, Muggeridge and the Bishop arrived 15 minutes late to see a screening of the movie, missing key portions of the movie. The footnote 10 leads to what? To an autobiography by Messrs. Python themselves (Chapman, Graham; Cleese, John; Gilliam, Terry; Idle, Eric; et al. (2003). The Pythons Autobiography by The Pythons.)! Also notice the weaselly phrase “it was later claimed”. Hardly a balanced, impartial report of that incident.
The following people thank Pineapple Records for this post:
sir walter raleigh, SgtPeppersBulldogA ginger sling with a pineapple heart,
a coffee dessert, yes you know it's good news...
4.24pm
10 March 2017
Regardless of whether she did it in a fit of rage or while calm, she still poured water over Paul’s lawyer, which wasn’t a good thing for Heather to do. In fact, I think it makes her look stupid, especially considering that she did it in court.
The following people thank Dark Overlord for this post:
Little Piggy DragonguyIf you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
5.07pm
1 December 2009
The following people thank vonbontee for this post:
Dark Overlord, Ahhh Girl, GardeningOctopus, WeepingAtlasCedars, Rachel, sir walter raleighGEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
1.56am
15 May 2015
Dark Overlord said
Regardless of whether she did it in a fit of rage or while calm, she still poured water over Paul’s lawyer, which wasn’t a good thing for Heather to do. In fact, I think it makes her look stupid, especially considering that she did it in court.
Well my point was just the typical inaccuracy of Wikipedia on some points; but yeah, it was a strange thing to do. It could only be understandable if she really had been treated unfairly by Paul and then by the Court in failing to do her justice. Considering what we have to go by, that’s a big “if”.
A ginger sling with a pineapple heart,
a coffee dessert, yes you know it's good news...
5.22am
10 March 2017
11.42pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Yeah. I’m amazed what almost 30 years and ill-health can do.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Dark Overlord, Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, WeepingAtlasCedars, Little Piggy Dragonguy"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
7.11am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Don’t throw rotten eggs at me, but I actually like Linda’s looks better in the first picture. She looks more mature, polished, and professional. I’ve thought that from the first time I saw one of her pictures when she was older.
Can buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. (2017) (2018)
7.53am
10 March 2017
No need to throw rotten eggs, we all have different opinions here and even if I wanted to, the worst I can do is show a picture of one.
It’s weird though when people prefer the look of someone when they’re older rather when they’re in their teens/20’s/30’s, reminds me of Stan Lee and how most of the pictures of him are from the last 20 or so years, although you can find pictures of him from the 1960’s when he was in his 40’s.
The following people thank Dark Overlord for this post:
Ahhh GirlIf you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
1 Guest(s)