Quote:
Originally Posted by osidak
lube - wasn't she the one that caused most of the **** to land on her
|
Saw her on Goodmorning America today. She seemed pretty level headed. She states that everything we've heard is pure BS and tabloid journalistic lies including the settlement which she claimed has not happened. Her position is:
-Paul was the bad guy and caused the divorce. She agreed not to "tell all" and plans to keep it that way.
-She wanted zero money, just to be left alone by lawyers and especially the papers.
-She has had no settlement in a court of law at all.
-She has now incurred $3mil in attorney fees defending herself against PM and the tabloid papers.
-She's suing to recover that money and to get PM to man up and get the media off her back by publicly stating that the fault was his.
I think that it's easy to point the "gold digger" finger because there are so many prior examples and we're a bunch of biased guys - some of whom are paying out hefty sums to some undeserving b*tch. However, in this case I'll suspend judgement. Is it really so hard to believe that a billionaire rock star (even an 800 year old one) is f*king around on his wife? As she said, he's a "demi-god" in the UK. I would hate to be under public scrutiny and in opposition to someone like that. Factor in the London news, which is little better than the National Enquirer, is attacking her. I actually pity the woman.