• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Gotto love British press

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Gotto love British press

    Sun turns up the heat on Mills McCartney

    Tara Conlan
    Wednesday October 25, 2006
    MediaGuardian.co.uk

    The Sun has stolen a march on Heather Mills McCartney's threat to sue the paper by asking her to "tick the boxes" on a series of allegations the paper has made about the former model.

    Today's paper tells readers that the estranged wife of former Beatle Sir Paul McCartney is planning to take legal action against the Sun.

    However, the story on page four says: "It is not clear what exactly she plans to sue us about."

    The paper then asks Mills McCartney: "Come on Heather, what exactly did we get wrong? Is it that you're a ..."

    Underneath the open question, the Sun lists six allegations about the former model, with a blank box beside each one.

    The words beside the boxes read: "Hooker, Liar, Porn Star, Fantasist, Trouble Maker, Shoplifter".

    The paper then asks the former model to "tick appropriate boxes" as to which, if any, of the allegations the Sun has made are untrue.

    Mills McCartney's solicitors announced yesterday she is planning to sue three newspapers over "false, damaging and immensely upsetting" statements in stories about her divorce from Sir Paul.

    Her law firm, Mishcon de Reya, said legal proceedings had already been started against the Daily Mail and the London Evening Standard, and action would soon be taken against the Sun.

    The storm over the McCartneys' increasingly bitter divorce escalated last week when parts of Mills McCartney's cross-petition for divorce, containing lurid and damaging allegations about Sir Paul's behaviour, were leaked to the press.

    Each is seeking a divorce decree on the grounds of the other's unreasonable behaviour, after a four-year marriage which produced a daughter, Beatrice, now three.

    ---

    Article in the Sun is here.

    Gotto love freedom of press!

    #2
    I have a feeling the papers have a lot more 'information' about her than they are letting on - they are waiting for the real court contest to start before they wade in to get maximum sales. As I said earlier, I wouldn't be at all surprised that tapes of her 'at work' from her younger days are exposed during the trial.
    Vieze Oude Man

    Comment


      #3
      Looks like they are baiting her to sue them big time - they know she is not getting money from Paul, but solicitor costs are piling up, if her character is destroyed then she can't possibly win much damages even if she proves she was right - they seem to be able to prove she was a hooker (she did not sue when they first did), so, seems she is on a loser. This one will be interesting to watch

      Comment


        #4
        Exactly... she really has received the most appalling advice. All she had to do was just keep quiet, and she'd walk away with millions. At this rate her legal costs will leave her penniless.

        I doubt all those rich arabs paid her £5k a weekend to serve tea.
        Vieze Oude Man

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by mcquiggd
          As I said earlier, I wouldn't be at all surprised that tapes of her 'at work' from her younger days are exposed during the trial.
          I'm very suprised FG hasn't posted them already!!
          How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

          Comment


            #6
            It's just the stupid heifer's greed.

            All she had to do was take the £30 million, ensure she got somewhere to live in her name to bring up the kid, and then screw him for maintenance so for the next 15 years she didn't have to dip into the £30 million.

            I wish I were her lawyers.....

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Troll
              I'm very suprised FG hasn't posted them already!!
              He might well have... difficult to tell these days!
              Vieze Oude Man

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Miss Ellie
                It's just the stupid heifer's greed.

                All she had to do was take the £30 million, ensure she got somewhere to live in her name to bring up the kid, and then screw him for maintenance so for the next 15 years she didn't have to dip into the £30 million.

                I wish I were her lawyers.....
                Why 30 mill for 1 kid? she can't claim she helped to establish his career, & her career was pretty well finished when they met, the duration of the marriage was short... can't see much being awarded beyond child support
                How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Troll
                  Why 30 mill for 1 kid? she can't claim she helped to establish his career, & her career was pretty well finished when they met, the duration of the marriage was short... can't see much being awarded beyond child support
                  Because a recent case set a precedent that if a woman divorces a man much richer than her after a short marriage to which she has had little time to make a substantive contribution, she had an expectation of a better life that it would be unjust to now deny her.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X