I know there is a child involved but in my opinion she should get a sum which reflects the length of the marriage - it would not be fair to take half his dosh. How did they get it so wrong?
2006-09-04 07:32:53 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
I don't think he'll have a choice. No prenup, no security. He thought Heather was going to be like Linda, that the marriage would last and that he didn't have to protect himself. Boy was he wrong and he'll have to pay through the nose for it.
2006-09-04 07:40:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no way...only enough to provide a comfortable life for her and the child until the child is 18. what did heather do for him but marry a guy on the rebound...the kid comes first, heather can make her own dosh like the rest of us...why should she have a free ride...
2006-09-04 14:39:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My god no, but I think she shouldn't be humiliated in public.
She was already rich enough to never work again (from here pay out and modelling).
In their world a house about 2 million and maintenance to be paid for the child I think is fair.
I think he should state in his will as well that the youngest child should not have any of his money untill she is 25 and parenting rights passed to the remainder of his 3 children. (So they will not lose contact with her)
2006-09-04 15:00:14 · answer #3 · answered by Emma 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh come on, she hasn't contributed anything to his fortune, it all came about from his being in a band DECADES before they got together. She should take what he offered, it's much more than enough to live comfortably for the rest of her life, and no doubt he'll still support the child.
2006-09-04 17:56:19 · answer #4 · answered by AndyB 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it takes 2 to split up a marriage. should she get half? i guess none of us really know the facts but half is a hell of a lot of money in this case. dont you think it should come down to half of the sum of money they both made during their marriage. I think divorce rulings need to take into consideration who is to blame...and come to a fair compromise for both parties. Courts should punish greedy individuals or gold diggers. why cant they just agree on what each should get based on what they need and whos to blame.
2006-09-04 14:44:26 · answer #5 · answered by s_lee1986 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree, she shouldn't get half his fortune. He worked a long time to get that, the amount given to her should be a partial ampount based on the money made during their marriage but should be compared to income she made as well!
That is how they do it for us normal folks! My son's child support is based on his current earnings and then mine.
2006-09-04 14:40:40 · answer #6 · answered by Gothic Martha™ 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I gave her some dosh already!
No more Dosh from Paulie!
I agree with Roxie below!
Cow, she's a cow!
2006-09-04 14:38:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I haven't hear the news but if this is the case, it's disgusting. The woman, sorry, one-legged hag hound, wasn't even born when he started having hits. She's a greedy, manipulative self-serving cow and I hope she get's nothing.
2006-09-04 14:38:53 · answer #8 · answered by Roxy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that's just foul. There is no way that she deserves half of his money. I could see if she had been married to him for over twenty years, but she wasn't. I agree that she should receive money to help take care of their daughter, but not half. Hopefully, she won't get it.
2006-09-04 14:50:33 · answer #9 · answered by mochasister 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you're right a generous settlement wd be ok but how come he
didn't take any precaution?all these marriages between people
with a big age difference stink,one knows immediately what's
behind it
2006-09-04 14:39:18 · answer #10 · answered by asso 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋