Quote of the day
On Heather Mills’s character: “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.”
On Mills’s financial affairs: “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.”
On Mills’s assertion of her earnings before meeting McCartney: “I find the wife’s case as to her wealth in 1999 to be wholly exaggerated.”
On Mills’s candour: “The wife for her part must have felt rather swept off her feet by a man as famous as the husband. I think this may well have warped her perception leading her to indulge in make believe. The objective facts simply do not support her case.”
On Mills’s spending habits during the divorce proceedings: “I have no doubt that in the wife’s mindset, there was an element that she was going to spend (in the 15-month period) in order thereby to hope to prove that a budget in excess of £3m per annum put forward in her form E in September 2006 was justifiable … I also detect symptoms of other, unreasonable expenditure to some extent in chartering planes which include helicopters.”
- the judge in the Mills-McCartney divorce case delivers his verdict on Heather
Witanagemot Blogs
What’s remarkable about the Judge’s comments is that he apears to accept that Lady McCartney actually does have a ‘mind’, hence ‘mindset’. No evidence was produced in Court to substantiate this hypothesis. I think there may be grounds for appeal.
A valid point. Perhaps she does indeed possess a mind, but was temporarily ‘out’ of it when she thought that any member of the public liked or respected her?