Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 10:42 AM ET, 03/19/2008

Questions I Have About Heather Mills

By Liz Kelly

Heather Mills gives the thumbs up sign as she leaves divorce court on Monday. Why?! (Getty Images)

This week, one-time "Dancing With the Stars" contestant and ex-Mrs. Paul McCartney made headlines when she thumbed her nose at a $50 million divorce settlement. Mills is an enigma wrapped in a tin foil placed inside a lead box and dropped into the Thames. Despite lacking most social graces, talent and much sensitivity as a parent she continues to make a steady kind of career for herself and remain in the headlines, usually because she's done something typically crass. Not surprisingly, I fixated on her and that air of mystery surrounding her raison d'etre. Below, my questions:

1. Why was she dressed like a nascent Pearlie for her divorce court appearance?

2. When disappointed with her $50 million divorce settlement, what thought process led to pouring water over the head of Paul McCartney's lawyer?

3. In what possible way is she qualified to judge the Miss USA pageant? (This presupposes that one need be qualified at all. Other judges include Jerry Springer, Kimora Lee Simmons and the always annoying big lug, Jonathan Antin.)

4. Why is Heather (reportedly) hiring Gloria Allred to rep her legally in the U.S.? Does she anticipate a lengthy, public legal imbroglio on this side of the Atlantic? Someone get Billy Joel, Jon Bon Jovi and Bruce Springsteen under lock and key, stat.

5. How low could this woman possibly go?

6. How long until she goes away? And what form will her disappearance take? A slow, painful reality-show laced bid to remain relevant or an abrupt awakening to her duties as a mom?

Have answers? Please share below...

By Liz Kelly  | March 19, 2008; 10:42 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Mix: Heath Ledger's Family Feuds Over Estate
Next: Morning Mix: Jennifer Lopez Debuts Twins


Two number Fives, Liz Kelly? Who do you think you are, Anne Boleyn?

Question 7: "Her cotton-picking mind: how far out, exactly, is she, of it?" (Answer may be expressed in scientific notation to save space.)

Posted by: byoolin | March 19, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I like that the NYPost makes its editorial position clear in that "how low" link: "the peg-legged money-grubber..."

Posted by: byoolin | March 19, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

My. If calling Heather Mills names is enough to earn you a pitcher of water over the head, I think we should all be walking around with umbrellas.

Posted by: h3 | March 19, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

At the risk of being eviscerated by byoolin and the rest of the gallery: did anyone ever like Ms. Mills? I mean, when she first broke on the scene as Sir Paul's sweetie, I was kindof happy for him to have found a woman who seemed to have her foot firmly planted on the ground. WTF happened?

And, has Stella weighed in on this anywhere?

Posted by: 16828 | March 19, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

to take a note from slim shaddy: would the real one legged gold digger please stand up?
(mean and nasty i know, but she is just an awful woman.)

Posted by: melissamac1 | March 19, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

16828, your use of the phrase "her foot planted firmly on the ground" when describing Ms. Mills earns you a Get Out Of Evisceration card.

I think the tabloids were at first nice to her. (Just as they were to Linda, before the "What do you call a dog with Wings" jokes...)

Posted by: byoolin | March 19, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

You want to know what Heather Mills really worries about?

Posted by: Richard 'ReallyWorried' Rubin | March 19, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Stella, what do you think?



Posted by: Stanley Kowalski | March 19, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Post of the day goes to 16828. I'm at my desk trying to stifle a chortle. And to answer the question, I thought that public sentiment leaned toward approval at Sir Macca finding a lovely human rights activist type to stroll with into his sunset years.

Posted by: 23112 | March 19, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

well, *I* never liked her. she took paul away from me. he was my backup plan if mr. methinks and i hadn't stayed together. who would have imagined that we would have lasted longer than paul & heather??

Posted by: methinks | March 19, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

"When disappointed with her $50 divorce settlement, what thought process led to pouring water over the head of Paul McCartney's lawyer?"

Well, when you phrase it as she only managed to get 50 bucks out of a multi-millionaire because of his lawyer, you could see why she might be a little miffed. :) However, with the proper M behind the number, it is a little more perplexing.

Posted by: CentrevilleMom | March 19, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Please, cut Heather some slack. It's getting harder and harder to get by on a measly $48 mill. She's in such dire financial straits that she had to borrow Two-Face's costume to wear to court.

P.S.: If her claims of helping Paul write his recent songs are true, she oughta pay us $48 mill. for having to listen to that crap.

Posted by: Gordon | March 19, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Before or after she turned into a harpie? She was ok before hand. What Sir Paul wants to do with his life is his business, but once she turned things ugly I lost all respect for her. Granted, we don't really know what happened behind closed doors, but Paul totally smells of roses in this one so far.

I hope the kid turns out ok. Too much time around Mizz Mills could stunt her growth.

Posted by: EricS | March 19, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Regarding the picture above, (and ignoring the jacket lest I choke on my own vomit), when did Heather Mills become Lisa Kudrow? And what did Lisa Kudrow do to deserve it?

Posted by: e | March 19, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

In answer to 16828, I actually never gave her any thought until after they were separated & she told some crazy story about Paul making her drag herself around the mansion by her fingernails because he refused to help her. From that point all I could think was, where did Paul find this crazy a$$ b*tch?

Posted by: jes | March 19, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was funny that she thinks the reason she got such a paltry settlement was because she represented herself in court & that was her punishment. You know how 'they' hate when people represent themselves. Then she advised everyone else going through a divorce to represent themselves and save a lot of money. Clearly the Logic & Reason bus bypassed Ms. Mills' stop.

Posted by: jes | March 19, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

To 16828 -

She may not have been wholly loved, but she wasn't wholly loathed.

Here's a BBC article from 2002.

As for how to explain her? I don't think there is an explanation. I would think anyone would get a settlement for the equivalent of $50 million and invest wisely and quietly.

Posted by: Chasmosaur | March 19, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Why does Paul McCartney come out as the victim in this case?? He picked her. He married her. He's a grown-up. I think he's a bigger fool that she is. But she's more fun to pick on.

Posted by: Amelia | March 19, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Amelia: Why does Sir Paul come out of this smelling like a rose? Because he had the brains (or perhaps the well-paid advisers) to keep his trap shut, sit back and allow Mills to pour a can of gasoline over her head and light a match. No bizarre press conferences, dancin' with the D-listers, courtroom water play, or two-tone suits for Ol' Mac. Just a silent, aging Beatle strolling out of court with his slightly damp attorney. (Although, I will say that the attorney's wet look was better than the Dynasty-era Poof-fest she strolled into court with).

Posted by: Kevin | March 19, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to think that a minimum requirement to be a Miss USA judge would be that one would have to be a resident of the USA.

But apparently that's not the case.

Posted by: Bored @ work | March 19, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

It's true that Paul deserves SOME of the blame for the marriage to Heather in general, but so far it seems at least POSSIBLE that she put on an act in order to get the one of the richest men in the world to marry her and she planned to take him for everything she could from very early on. Also, who hasn't dated someone only to find out later that they weren't exactly what you thought. I think the fact that his grown children (it would be different if they were young and still living at home, there's all sorts of dynamics that go on there) didn't like her from the beginning should have been a signal to Paul that something was off.

Posted by: tl | March 19, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, what Amelia said. Paul did the typical older-man thing - was so psyched to be getting some that he married the younger blonde and then, SURPRISE SURPRISE, turns out to have been a bad idea. Puh-leeze.

I honestly have no idea how I'd scrape by on a paltry 48 mil. I would have rejected that deal, too. Fer sher.

Posted by: jaybbub | March 19, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

To clarify my above remarks: I think the blame runs about Macca-10%, Mucca-150%! But my numbers may not add up! ha ha

Posted by: tl | March 19, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Kevin, I LOVE "Dynasty-era Poof-fest" and will be trying to incorporate its use on a regular basis.

Posted by: still | March 19, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

OF COURSE she needs lots and lots of money - she's going to donate it AND help to spur the economy! Maybe she'll shower her millions on the deserving poor and human rights victims by flying low in her new Mills-copter...

Posted by: Maritza | March 19, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

To clarify my above remarks: I think the blame runs about Macca-10%, Mucca-150%! But my numbers may not add up! ha ha

Don't worry about it tl, its Bush math.

IMHO, I believe Macca married too soon after Linda's death. There was an article yesterday that said he continued to wear his wedding band from Linda until his marriage to Heather and he even admitted he was still in love with his first wife.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I am FASCINATED by the water dumping. What was the reaction in the british court? "Oh dyah. The Barrister has been doused. What to do?". Isn't that contempt or something? Heather Mills has been a fine example for equal rights for disabled. She is living proof that we are all fully capable of being a--holes. Whether of not we have both feet firmly planted on the ground. Prenup next time, Sir Paul!

Posted by: TheGirlJustWhines | March 19, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

It is better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.

Paul's lawyer should sue the skank for assault.

Posted by: hangin in herndon | March 19, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

"16828, your use of the phrase 'her foot planted firmly on the ground' when describing Ms. Mills earns you a Get Out Of Evisceration card. I think the tabloids were at first nice to her. (Just as they were to Linda, before the 'What do you call a dog with Wings' jokes...)"

BRAVO, byoolin! I'd forgotten about the dog-with-Wings joke. Between peg-legged and foot-planted-firmly, I just can't stop laughing. Oh God that's funny!

As for Heather being a pageant judge, she is certainly more qualified that Kimora Lee Simmons! And at least Jerry Springer's been around long enough to qualify as something (not sure what, though).

Though with that trio, it's readily apparent that they were scraping the bottom of the barrel for Miss USA judges. Did Sam Lutfi have a conflict that day?

Posted by: td | March 19, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

What happened to her big human rights activist streak? At first blush, she seemed like a good fit for Paul. Now her true colors have apparently come out. With all her tv and court appearances, you never hear of her doing anything even remotely human rights related - not even plugging her favorite org while peg-leg dancing. Which makes me wonder - was she truly an activist or was she actively seeking attention any way she could get it? Yeah, Paul's responsible, but she really could have misrepresented herself to get what she wanted.

Posted by: rachelt | March 19, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

What happened to her big human rights activist streak? At first blush, she seemed like a good fit for Paul. Now her true colors have apparently come out. With all her tv and court appearances, you never hear of her doing anything even remotely human rights related - not even plugging her favorite org while peg-leg dancing. Which makes me wonder - was she truly an activist or was she actively seeking attention any way she could get it? Yeah, Paul's responsible, but she really could have misrepresented herself to get what she wanted.

Posted by: rachelt | March 19, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

She's a ho fo sho. Nuff said.

Posted by: akmitc | March 19, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Definitely not a MILF.

Posted by: Right Winger | March 19, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Oh come on. How many of you have known people go through bitter divorces? People get very weird and occasionally wear mismatched outfits (gasp!). This one just happens to involve some one filthy rich trying to dump (for whatever reason) his much younger wife.
I know a lot of people think Sir Paul is a saint, and that the Beatles were all things to all people, and that Linda can never be replaced etc., but this hating of Heather seems over the top. Especially the "peg leg" part.

Posted by: possum | March 19, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Um, she's dressed like a court jester

Posted by: Anon | March 19, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

"And this, students, is Example A in 'The Usage and Application of Prenuptial Agreements.'"
That's what I really don't get. Why, why, WHY wouldn't someone with that much property set up a prenup? Are you that sure that you'll be together forever, or that, should you break up, you'll do it cleanly? Or do you just figure that your lawyers can take care of any situations that might arise?

Posted by: 51 | March 19, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Puhleeze. I think $1 million for each year of their marriage would have been a gracious plenty. She claims she was pulling in a decent salary before she gave up her "careers" -- model, activist, whatever -- to marry Sir Paul, so let her go back to work. And I agree, she's going to drag him back into court over every nit-picking thing she can . . . . all for Beatrice's benefit, of course.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

My ?s...

1. Like RachelT, I also want to know what happened to her activism. So, Heather, what happened to your activism? Weren't you against land mines or something like that?

2. Is that suit some way of communicating to the judge that you really need a lot more than $50 M to dress decently? I guess at a measley $50 M, you really couldn't afford one of your now former stepdaughter's lovely frocks.

3. When do you sign on with E! for a reality TV show?

4. Why Gloria Alred when Howard K. Stern was currently available (and making better progress with his cases)?

5. When do you plan to get together with Sam Lutfi?

Posted by: MoCoSnarky | March 19, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

A ho fo sho dats goin to da sto. Avoid the mall, y'all.

Posted by: erm | March 19, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I think she deserves every penny she gets. He doesn't seem like much of a prize to me - despite the 60's worshipers' infatuation with him.

Plus, how do you know that all of her annoying qualities weren't exactly what Paul Mc. LIKED about her? Maybe he was attracted to her self-promoting, high opinion of herself. Maybe he liked all that drama and he was sick of all the people who fawn all over him b/c of his being in some band way back in last century? Maybe fawning, cloying women get on his nerves and he wanted a bit of excitment and drama. Women do this all the time - marry the biker wife-beater cause he's more exciting than the accountant.

And the water-throwing incident would definitely be a turn-on to the type of person seeking drama and gutsines. It sounds as if she has always had this personality and he's just tired of it now.

I think she deserves exactly what any other similarly situated ex-wife of a non-famous, yet weathly man would get.

Posted by: Amelia | March 19, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if SirPaul's lawyer slipped Heather some cash to dump that pitcher on her head. You basically can't buy that kind of responese.

Posted by: HardyW | March 19, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Spitzer paid $4500 dollars per hour to "Kristen" from the Emperor Club. McCartney paid $4.86 million dollars to Heather Mills.

Am I wrong to believe that Heather and Kristen are in the same line of work?

If they have any self respect, they should have no difficulty finding a more honorable way of making a living.

Posted by: Mickey | March 19, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

It must suck to have one leg. Ha.

Posted by: xtine | March 19, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

I've never understood why after a rich people marry for a few years one party thinks they are due to 1/2 or more of the others fortune that was acquired before they even knew each other. Heather Mills claims she was well off before she married Sir Paul so why does she need 1/2 of what he is worth?? It's interesting to see how many people believe what she claims happened during her marriage but yet there is no proof. She has aired her dirty laundry in public, when you do that you get critisized.

Posted by: no_bs4me | March 19, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

possum, she wasn't wearing a mismatched outfit, she was wearing an outfit that looked like it was half denim and half corduroy and she was (apparently) wearing it on purpose. mismatched is wearing bright blue polka dots with pink and green plaid.
she has no style, and for that alone she should be shunned, Amish-style. thus, she is dead to me. goodbye, heather.

Posted by: methinks | March 19, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

no_bs, in fairness to Heather (can't believe I just typed that) she was not seeking 1/2 of Paul's dough. By her account, he was worth 800 million. Her claim was for like 250 million, which is just over 1/4 of what she thinks he's worth.
She ended up getting around 6% (of 400 mill, which is what the judge said he was worth). Seems like a bargain for Sir Paul if you ask me.

Posted by: still | March 19, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

i read yesterday somewhere about how sad it was going to be for beatrice because she wouldn't have enough for proper schools and first class airline tickets to visit her father. that these words actually came out of a person's mouth with the intent of seeking sympathy really shocks and appalls.

Posted by: g | March 19, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

I want to know what kind of lifestyle a toddler has to adopt to whip through $70,000/year. Is she saving up for rehab later?

Posted by: Angela | March 19, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

clarification: that heather was lamenting how sad it would be for beatrice with the schools and economy class tix...

Posted by: g | March 19, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

erm, your 2.17 almost exactly captures the lyrics of Sir Paul's upcoming single he recorded with Snoop.

Early reports are that it will be like "Ebony & Ivory," but with a hip-hop vibe.

Amelia might be onto something with her 'he was looking for someone like her' theory: he always wrote about female authority figures (Rita the meter maid, the ex-cop who came in through is bathroom window, the Queen, Martha). Maybe he did want someone to tell him what to do.

Posted by: byoolin | March 19, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

"mismatched is wearing bright blue polka dots with pink and green plaid."


Posted by: byoolin | March 19, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

b/c of his being in some band way back in last century?
Posted by: Amelia | March 19, 2008 02:17 PM

Careful Amelia - many of the folks posting here REMEMBER that "some band" well and may not take kindly to being portrayed as centenarians! Besides, if he was in Herman's Hermits or the Union Gap Band, that would be "some band" - the Beatles simply can not be written off in that manner.

she has no style, and for that alone she should be shunned, Amish-style. thus, she is dead to me. goodbye, heather.

Posted by: methinks | March 19, 2008 03:10 PM

HAHAHAHA!! Thanks for saying it best methinks. Goodbye Heather, you will not be missed.

I would like to nominate methinks for a consecutive comment of the week award for the above statement!

Posted by: sunnydaze | March 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

The woman is a piranah.

Paul was a fool. He was still mourning Linda, his kids didn't like Heather, he went ahead and married her without prenup and, surprise surprise, she instantly got pregnant, which is the only sure-fire way to prise maximum dough from a divorce.

I haven't read much from the court proceedings, but has custody of Beatrice been addressed or was this part strictly about the money? Heather keeps talking about her and Beatrice as if she's attaching the child at the hip.

Posted by: hermespal | March 19, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

One year of the child support would cover primary and secondary education at most private schools in England. So Beatrice *will* have plenty left over for therapy, thank god.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

"I'd like to think that a minimum requirement to be a Miss USA judge would be that one would have to be a resident of the USA."

or have good judgement.......

Posted by: changingfaces | March 19, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

I don't think its case of a filthy rich dumping his young wife. If you go back and read the transcripts of some of her interviews where she claims she's the victims of death threats she sounds very wacked out and bizarre. And the divorce was initiated by her wackiness, because "I just can't take all the negative publicity."

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Byoolin: Martha was a sheepdog, not really an authority figure (except to the sheep). Although perhaps Heather took heart from the song's lyrics:

Hold your hand out you silly girl see what you've done
When you find yourself in the thick of it
Help yourself to a bit of what is all around you
Silly girl.

Posted by: Nine | March 19, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

She's crazy and unstable.

However--- she did a HUGE favor for the lawyer when she dumped the jug of water over her head. Her hairdo looked SO much better.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Custody stays half and half, and there was a separate financial arrangment for child support.

"When disappointed with her $50 divorce settlement, what thought process led to pouring water over the head of Paul McCartney's lawyer?"

She probably thought it was cute (she was wrong, as usual), and at that point, she it was all over but the whining, so she probably figured "Why not?"

I've always thought Sir Paul was an asshat, and I don't feel sorry for him. But Ms. Mills was a gold digger, no question. All you have to do is read the divorce decree to see how she tried to weasel as much money out of the situation as possible, including what might legally be attempted fraud in the matter of some nonexistent loans and mortgages.

Posted by: BW by the Bay | March 19, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

As creative as he is, and as much as I have enjoyed Sir Paul's music, I have to think that marrying this greedy and ill-mannered shrew makes him the Fool on the Hill.

Posted by: MisterBear | March 19, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

The pre-nup wouldn't have helped much as they are not binding in the UK as they are in the US. Even if he had one, it would be up to the judge presiding over the divorce whether to enforce it.

Throwing water on someone is really bizarre behavior. I am wondering if there is an imbalance or something going on medically.

Though it does seem very smart to save some of her vitriol for the lawyer rather than her ex-husband, as he is pretty much revered.

And the $70K a year is in addition to schooling/child care so I have to wonder how much can a toddler spend on food and clothing? And as far as traveling B-class, how far is this child going to live from her father? Mills indicated that she wouldn't leave Britain because her child needed to be close to Daddy. So where exactly is all this B-class traveling going to take place? Macca shouldn't have to pay for travel if Mucca is dragging the kid to pageants and dance-offs and whatnot.

Posted by: dizzy | March 19, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, the water-throwing is bizarre to me too. To physically lash out at someone is never a good sign. Why didn't she dump it on Paul? He's the one she's got the beef with - Mills shouldn't have an issue with the attorney. On another level, though, if she believes herself qualified to be her own attorney, then she could perceive the other as competition. The water episode is just the icing on the crazy cake.

Posted by: rachelt | March 19, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Heather Mills is a pig, and has always been a golddigging pig. I don't know why the U.S. would give her the time of day. I wouldn't bother to watch.

Posted by: Lisa | March 19, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Heather Mills is obviously certifiable..and money grubbing to boot. But for her hints at leaving the UK, there is an international convention that requires that the non-custodial parent must give permission for an underage child to be removed from the country of normal residence. In other words, Heather can't take Beatrice anywhere without Paul's permission. My hope is that Paul will sue for sole custody, will win on the grounds of Heather being a complete nut job, and then Heather can slink back under the rock she came from.

Posted by: expat52 | March 19, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

£ady Mill$ should be arrested for dumping water on that lawyer lady; you know what she would do if it happened to her.

Posted by: rapidy | March 19, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone else sense a Brit situation coming on? If she starts hitting Starbucks more than once a day and goes sans underwear head for Home Depot for the plastic and duct tape.

Posted by: Anonymous | March 19, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

When Paul first got together with Heather, I was skeptical and thought it was too soon after Linda. Then I thought, heck, if he's happy and his kids like her...oh wait, his kids hate her and then they had a fight and she tossed her ring away? That's when I knew they were doomed.

I feel rotten for Bea, but some witnesses say she's already got the entitlement bug from her old mum. Let's hope her dad sets her straight.

As for her dad: Paul McCartney may be a damn fool, but Heather Mills (IMHO) has a personality disorder. Sometimes such people are able to hide their...problem or disguise it behind a display of flattery or charm or exciting behavior. I've no doubt he was jolted out of his least for a time.

She's clearly a chronic liar and was out for all she could get from minute one.

As Paul's youngest child, Beatrice is entitled to a big chunk of his estate (again IMHO), as are his other four children. Heather wasn't entitled to anything more than child support for Bea. Her complaint that Paul didn't need all that money so why not give it to her? Codswallop. She has no right to his children's inheritance.

I used to think Stella's reactions to her were exaggerated - now I know better.

How low can Heather Mills go? I have no idea. She keeps lowering the bar.

Posted by: missjulian | March 19, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

How low will she go?

I don't think she could go much lower, I mean she was supposidly a high price hooker back in the day. She throws the fact that she has one leg in your face any chance she gets. Upon hearing that she would get $50 million, she douses Paul's lawyer with water. She is tasteless, classless, greedy and all around general scum bag. This ho was the biggest mistake Paul ever made. Well' maybe "Ebony & Ivory" was a bigger mistake but still.

Posted by: awhistlingfool | March 19, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Heather Mills ruined the Beatles.

Posted by: kindathinker | March 19, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Oh fine, go burn her at the stake, then. Only don't make too much noise...I'm going to bed.

Posted by: possum | March 19, 2008 9:11 PM | Report abuse

Psychos, sociapaths, are liars. They don't think for anyone else. Selfish, always think of herself. And they get bored easily. And they are mostly intelligent. You can look online and read about them.
One thing that I learned new from the Judge, I really wanted to know that, that Heather mills couldn't produce any proof that she did give any money to all the charities. I believe that she believes her story but it isn't truth.

Posted by: abeatlefanalways | March 19, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

As to why no pre-nup--they're not enforceable in Great Britain. They can be taken into consideration as an indication of intentions but they can also backfire, in very unpredictable ways.

Most people with real money in England don't mess with them. They do what Sir Paul did instead: maintain clearly separate finances during the marriage in order to keep it clear that they are not sharing finances with the new spouse. He made her a very generous allowance, made her very generous presents but did not share bank accounts or any other financial matters with her.

Posted by: rosalba | March 19, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

How about this question:

How is it she threw a glass of water at Paul 's attorney during the trial but was not cited for contempt and still won 50 mil? Things must be way different in the UK than over here.

Posted by: Days of Broken Arrows | March 19, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: NICK CONTOMPASIS | March 20, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Ahhh, I see...thanks for the explanation of prenups in Britain. I am a silly American (although, perhaps more to the point, my acquaintance with the law is limited to what I can pull from episodes of Law and Order. D'oh).

and to the previous poster:

Posted by: 51 | March 20, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

She makes Yoko Ono look like not that bad a choice as a Beatle's wife.

Posted by: John | March 20, 2008 1:27 AM | Report abuse

Wow, such a witch hunt. I'm going to be the dissenting opinion here for a moment, so get out your pitch forks. PM is a well known megalomaniac and control freak. It is documented that he would not even give his first wife grocery money. In fact, he didn't feel he should have to give her a CENT to run their household because she was already wealthy vis a vis her own family. PM has a king sized ego, is a known manipulator and likes to have his way. This has been documented in numerous books and interviews about The Beatles. (If John Lennon was alive he'd likely be saying the same things.) Heather Mills may not be perfect, but it's clear to me that he could not control her and that was what ended the marriage. Also, his wife died. When a spouse dies, they are suddenly sainted by the surviving family. His children would have hated ANYONE who came into his life after that. I personally believe they made Heather's life hell and Paul ultimately chose his kids over his wife. You take that, coupled with Heather's unstable background, and it breeds paranoia. I think it's also telling that she had to represent herself in court. No attorney would touch her out of fear of PM and his power. I also think the Judge's 'opinions' were highly unethical. Judges are supposed to be impartial. He was not. A Judge publishing that kind of drivel in a prominent family court case in the U.S. would have the case nullified. I feel sorry for the child in question here, because she will likely remember her father and half-siblings slagging her mother. That kind of alienation is hard to overcome.

Posted by: mobmentality | March 20, 2008 3:04 AM | Report abuse

If she is as wonderful as she claims and so full of charity we can all cheer for her when she donates 48.6 million to her favorite charity.

Posted by: fairandjust | March 20, 2008 5:09 AM | Report abuse

Like all the other time-wasting, "celebrities" that invade our lives, she will go away only when we (collectively) stop writing, reading and gossiping about her.

Without us, she's just another blob of humanity, stumbling along from cradle to grave.

Posted by: RAS | March 20, 2008 5:18 AM | Report abuse

Mobmentality: You so wasted good time defending Heather Mills. Have you even seen her porn pics out there? Such a skank. And she didn't "have" to represent herself; she "chose" to dismiss her team of lawyers, therefore ending up with a fool for a lawyer AND a fool for a client: herself! People in the U.S. don't like her any better than people in the U.K.

Posted by: TWSTDSIS | March 20, 2008 6:21 AM | Report abuse

Sister is obviously crazy, but has not taken complete leave of her senses. She hired Gloria Allred to go after Sir Paul's US assets. That is like a match made in HEAVEN!! Neither of these women have ever met a press conference that they didn't love.

Anyway, poor Bea. The thing about Linda's kids is that they were raised with a sense of decorum and have managed to stay out of the negative spotlight. Her mama is going to use her as bait.

Posted by: LJO | March 20, 2008 6:50 AM | Report abuse

Pre-nups are legal and enforceable in Britain, they are just not binding. Judges can and usually do take them into consideration. No doubt it would have been hugely helpful to Paul if he had signed one--at least it would have shown his intent to protect his assets.

Heather has a history of expressing her, umm, dissatisfaction by dumping things on people. She once emptied a plate of pasta over her first husband's head.

I suggest reading the judge's ruling to learn the full, fascinating and infuriating truth of this situation. There is only one possible reason to feel any sympathy at all for a despicable creature like Heather Mills--she is clearly mentally ill.

How low will she go? Here's your answer.

Also explains why she has partnered up with a militantly feminist lawyer like Gloria Allred. She's out for revenge against a powerful man.

Posted by: Chrisanne | March 20, 2008 7:28 AM | Report abuse

mobmentality - you clearly haven't read the judgement properly. If you had, you would not have made half the assertions that you have made. In releasing the judgement, the judge was not unethical. It had to be released because reveals many things about her character which she would have preferred to keep hidden. She was happy to talk about what she got but she did not want anyone to know how much she asked for and how she behaved throughout the divorce proceedings.

The judge wrote the judgement in a way that made the route by which he came to his decisions transparent. This does not make him biased or unprincipled. Legal opinion was SPM's lawyers played it right down the middle and they were scrupulously fair with her. There was no attempt to hide anything and Heather was given credit where it was due. But it was also abundantly clear that she grossly exaggerated many many things about herself and her contribution to the marriage in a bid to extort money. (She also attempted to defraud SPM in the run up to the breakdown of the marriage but that is another issue). The judge would have considered those things and awarded an appropriate amount if she had been able to prove them. She could not even provide bank statements to support what she was saying. When someone cannot produce a bank statement or any kind of record of their earnings, including from the Government (who keep such records and can be approached and asked for them), you know there is a problem. The judge also asked for tax returns - there was nothing in them to support her claims about her income and wealth at the time of meeting Sir Paul McCartney. She said she gave pots of money to charity. Again, there was no evidence whatsoever of her donations. So this woman went into court, said she wanted £125m and could not provide a SHRED of evidence to support her demands.

Your statement about SPM trying to control her is ridiculous. Heather is an extremely strong willed woman. She tried to claim that SPM refused to allow her to take on various lucrative jobs (again, she could not provide evidence of any of the work she says she was offered). It was also clear from her conduct in court and in front of the press that this is not a woman who will told what to do. Ever. Consequently, SPM made no attempt to do so because he said "you don't tell the wife what to do". By inference, it was clear that SHE was the one who liked to be in control and at the centre of attention.

Then there were all the contributions she allegedly made to his career - she described herself as his 'business partner". Well that was obviously preposterous. What skill does she have to fulfill that role? She even said she did his accounts. When did she train as an accountant? She said he 'hired her to take pictures, design stage sets and help him write his songs". Now why would he need her help with these things after having a successful career spanning 40+ years? It was obviously ludicrous.

Basically the woman grossly exaggerated many things in order to justify her case for more money. She was given countless opportunities to provide evidence to support what she was saying. She couldn't. If she had been able to prove what she had been saying, I am sure she would have got more money.

You cannot blame SPM for that.

As to the legal stuff, Mischon de Reya represented Heather Mills for most of the period after her divorce. They only parted ways after her rampage in October/November last year. She says it was a mutual and cordial parting but it wasn't. They were simply frustrated by her refusal to listen to them. She went into court with the case they prepared for her. All the legal submissions had already been done by then. So in reality, she didn't really represent herself. It was just another ploy for sympathy. The reality is she wanted to speak for herself in court.

Your statements about Linda McCartney and their children are untrue. First, Linda was sainted well before she died. The public had got over whatever qualms it had about SPM marrying an American divorcee with a child. In the early days, many viewed her as not good enough for him but that was merely about jealousy. She was accepted long before she died and sainted because of her work protecting the environment and animals. In addition, SPM made a great deal of effort to get the public and media to accept her and it was clear that she made a huge contribution to their marriage. Finally, Linda used to make jokes about SPM's tightfistedness. The reality is he gave her money for groceries and the like but he liked the simple life and refused to indulge in luxuries all the time because he thought they were a waste of money. She embraced that because she loved him - they seemed very happy to me - and it kept them all grounded.

As to the children, in the court papers that Heather Mills submitted to support her financial demands, she described herself as someone who tried to "improve communication" between SPM and his children. She also said she "mothered" his children after the loss of their mother. Does that sound like a relationship involving hatred to you? Why would she say this if she felt she was genuinely hated by those children? You have to remember, they were grown adults, not kids. They were never going to be jealous of her in that way. They may have distrusted her motives, which was a different thing. They may also have expressed their reservations to their father. They were entitled to do that because they were worried about him. As it turned out, if they did so, they were right to.

You have made lots of statements and many of them are not true. SPM never spoke out against Heather Mills. Not once did he say a word against her publicly. What he said privately is his business. He made pleas for privacy several times after the split and asked the press to leave her alone more than once. He did not behave badly. She did. The only point I accept from you is to acquire the sort of wealth he has acquired over the years, he had to be pretty controlling. Certainly, when the Beatles started out, he would have been because they were all desperate for success. But that was then. He has made his money and he is living the life he wants to lead - he doesn't need any more. This man was settling into his twilight years. He married this woman intending the marriage to last until he died. She enthralled him - he admits this. But he also says there were signs of her instability and this led him to question whether the marriage could last. Judging by her behaviour this week, he was right to be worried. I am guessing she was argumentative, jealous, verbally abusive and aggressive with him behind closed doors (because if she can throw water at a lawyer, what would she do when no one can see?). He is an old man and he wants a quiet life. That is why he walked away.

Posted by: HCS | March 20, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

$50MM for four years of marriage not including $70,000/year child support (so sad that she cannot cover 1st class tix on $50MM + 70k/yr) is more tha enough. The child will be fine, after all Paul still has $800-$1.6Bn. Mills has way too high an opinion of her worth she is nothing. I see little difference between her and Spitzers Call Girl except that one pretends to be what she is not and the other knows what she is/was.

Posted by: richard c | March 20, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Paul met Heather and thought that he found someone who can be with him for the rest of his life. Heather on her defense, did fell for Paul (and his status). What unravel the marriage was their difference on how they live their daily lives. Paul was low key, didn't need full team security, sent his children to public school, wanted his children to grow up as normal as possible given his stature. Heather on the other hand, wanted all the glitz that SPM's money can buy and when SPM refused to caved in with her demands, she probably became unreasonable (judging on her dumping water to SPM's atty.) This is why when SPM initiated the divorce, his basis was "unreasonable behavior".

SPM already lived the limelight as a Beatle and in this stage of his life, he just want to enjoy the simple pleasures of life. Heather on the other hand was 32 years old when she met SPM. She wanted everything... fame, fortune, grandeur, glitz,etc...and when the marriage did not work, she still wanted it all.

Posted by: lily | March 20, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

First off, Heather Mills didn't ruin The Beatles. She came on the scene over 30 years after they split. I am glad the divorce trial has ended - at least I hope it has ended. Paul can now go back to a normal life and hopefully tour!!!!

Posted by: Meryl | March 20, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

p wuz lost in the strawberry fields & thats why theres no prenup

Posted by: phil ( not dr ) | March 20, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

How could Paul think that Heather was in love with him, from the start it was as plain as the nose on your face - A gold digger and a silly old man, a silly old man that had had his ego boosted - Heather almost cost him his family, his sanity and a lot of money.
Be more careful when choosing your next partner Paul listen to Stella she's a better judge of character than yourself.

Posted by: Marion Betty | March 20, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Their behavior and words behind closed doors. The lack of pre-nup. Everyone's perceptions and beliefs as to what type of person each one is. Paul's wealth. Both of their histories. How recently Linda had died.

None of that means anything at all. (at least to me)

What speaks volumes is their public demeanor. Paul behaved with discretion, restraint and class in a very difficult and painfull time that was embarrasingly public. Can the same be said of Heather?

I hope that this can subside, and that Paul can move on quietly. Unfortunately, Heather does not look like she will let that happen...

Posted by: Slybird | March 20, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

I don't think that Paul was "silly" "old" man, yes, he could be happier with lots of other woman, maybe thousands or hundred thousands than HM. He used to have that attention from Linda and before that, and he didn't knew what HM was. Stella knew and the public know too.
I liked the Judge, but it could better if Heather has to some mental therapy,(like 10 years) and not any money unless gets her behavior in check. And 1/2 of $50million have to give to animals and land mines.

Posted by: MissLucy | March 20, 2008 10:45 PM | Report abuse

So sad that it ended this is time to PUT THIS STORY TO BED!!!
$1M Australian dollars, wisely invested will yield ~ $70 - 90K per year...sufficient to live VERY WELL!
$50M will yield sufficient to support a small country...if Heather isn't willing to support the impoverished with her new-found-wealth...then she should fade into "oblivion"...where she belongs!!!

Posted by: Jill from Western Australia | March 21, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

Now Sir Paul is available again...'pick me! pick me!' :)

Posted by: Miss Janet | March 21, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company