10.2 The petitioner has behaved in a vindictive, punitive manner towards the respondent, on occasion thereby exposing her to risk.
10.3 In breach of his promises to the respondent made when she agreed to marry him, the petitioner continued to use illegal drugs, and to consume alcohol to excess, throughout the marriage, thereby causing the respondent distress.
11.2 On one occasion in Los Angeles in or about the end of October or beginning of November 2002, in the presence of others, the petitioner (who was drunk) loudly pointed out that the respondent was in an "bad mood." (The respondent was unhappy because hostile comments had been made about her on the Barbara Walters show).
When the petitioner and respondent got back to their house they began to argue about the petitioner's behaviour towards the respondent.
The petitioner grabbed the respondent by the neck and pushed her over a coffee table. He then went outside, and in his drunken state he fell down a hill, cutting his arm (which remains scarred to this day).
11.3 On 12 May 2003 when the petitioner and the respondent were in a hotel in Rome and the respondent was four weeks pregnant, the petitioner behaved coldly and with indifference towards the respondent who was distressed by a derogatory newspaper article about her.
An argument ensued between them in the bathroom during which the petitioner became angry and pushed the respondent into the bath.
The respondent suffered shock and distress. Notwithstanding this, the petitioner procured the respondent's attendance at his concert that evening by instructing his staff to pester her until she relented.
11.4 On the same occasion, and following the concert, in a fit of pique because the respondent refused to go to the after-show party and instead dine privately at a restaurant with her sister and her personal female bodyguard, the petitioner directed the female bodyguard to abandon the respondent, leaving her exposed to the attentions of the hordes of fans (500,000 attending a free concert) in Rome at that time.
At the end of the meal, the respondent was forced to take a 30-minute walk back to the hotel, no taxi being available and the car driven by the female bodyguard having been withdrawn from her use by the petitioner. 11.5 In Long Island in August 2003 the respondent asked the petitioner if he had been smoking marijuana. He became very angry, yelled at her, grabbed her neck and started choking her.
11.17 The respondent was delivered of her daughter by caesarean section and was very tired after the birth.
Despite this, the petitioner forced her to accompany him everywhere having no regard to her emotional or physical (and especially, her disability) needs.
Indeed, in this connection some two and a half years later (22 April 2006), shortly after the respondent's revision amputation surgery, she was forced to crawl on her hands and knees up aeroplane steps because they were not wide enough to take her wheelchair.
The petitioner had assured the respondent that he had taken care of her disability needs in connection with the trip (which he compelled her to take with him), but in fact he had not troubled to do so.
11.18 The petitioner often told the respondent when she was pregnant that he did not want her to breast-feed their child, making on occasion the comment "they are my breasts" and on another occasion, "I don't want a mouthful of breast milk." Notwithstanding this, the respondent did breast-feed Beatrice until, after six weeks, the petitioner's constant interrupting of her when breast-feeding (often in the presence of a midwife) had become so intolerable to her that she gave up.
This made her feel very miserable and demoralised.
11.19 On 19 November 2005, the petitioner required the respondent to defer an essential and once-cancelled operation on her leg for two months because it would have interfered with his holiday plans.
11.20 The respondent was expected to prepare two dinners every night, one for the child of the family and one for the petitioner. The petitioner did not like the respondent to be assisted in the preparation of his meals, despite her disability.
Even when the respondent had a broken pelvic plate in December 2003 the petitioner insisted that she cook for him while she was on crutches, could barely move and was in agony.
11.21 The petitioner refused to allow the respondent to get out of bed before he was ready to get up in the morning even though she would wake up early and wished to use the time for essential physiotherapy for her leg and to attend to emails and administrative tasks before the staff arrived or their child woke up.
11.24 The respondent often needs to go to the bathroom during the night, when her prosthetic limb is not fitted and so has to crawl to the bathroom on her hands and knees. This causes calluses and scrapes on her knees.
She asked the petitioner if she could buy an antique bedpan to keep under the bed and use at night if necessary (whilst he was asleep) so as to avoid her having to struggle. The petitioner objected
He wheeled her out, screaming at her to apologise vociferously, saying that it would be like being in "an old woman's home."
11.25 Throughout the marriage, the petitioner refused to allow the respondent to use his beautiful spare office in New York, on the floor beneath their apartment, in a building owned by the petitioner; he told her that he did not want her to have an office in the same building.
This was notwithstanding that she wanted to work on charity matters during Beatrice's two-hour nap and also be near to Beatrice in case she woke up.
Using the office in the apartment block would also have meant that the respondent could have created a créche area in part of the office for Beatrice to play in for part of the time.
The respondent could not understand the petitioner's refusal as he allowed his staff to work in the spare office if necessary, but he remained firm in his view.
At the end of September or the beginning of October 2005, the petitioner reluctantly agreed to provide her with alternative office space in the city but in the event insisted that she use an office that was far too small for any sensible purpose and was 20 minutes walk away, which meant the respondent would have to leave Beatrice behind during her nap.
When the respondent went to view it, she was chased by paparazzi, and was so demoralised by the experience, she never used the office.
The petitioner called her "an ungrateful bitch" in front of their driver when she explained why the office was not right for her.
The petitioner made his position known in front of other people, including staff, which caused the respondent to feel insignificant and humiliated. 11.29 On Thursday 27 April 2006 the respondent knew that the petitioner would be too hungover to help her with Beatrice and due to her own incapacity as a result of the recent operation, she had to call the babysitter to ask if she could come to help at 7.45am in getting Beatrice into the car and to the nursery.
The respondent went with the babysitter to drop Beatrice at the nursery and collected her later that day.
When she returned, the petitioner had woken up and tried to make a joke of the incident the night before.
The respondent appeased him, as she feared what would happen otherwise. That evening the petitioner drank very little (a half bottle of wine) and went to bed.
The following day, Friday 28 April 2006, the petitioner went to London but said he would be back in time to help the respondent put Beatrice to bed.
He did not arrive back at her bedtime, even though he knew the respondent could not cope on her own. The respondent had to ask a friend to help put Beatrice to bed.
At 10pm the petitioner returned home staggering drunk and slurring his words, demanding his dinner.
The respondent stated that it was on the stove but that she would not be cooking for him again, as he had no respect for her.
The petitioner called her "a nag" and went to bed.
That evening the respondent realised the marriage had irretrievably broken down and left, crawling on her hands and knees whilst dragging her wheelchair, crutches and basic personal possessions to the car.
Paul must be wondering what on earth he was thinking when he married this psycopath.
We now have the answer to the question 'Will ya still need me, will ya still feed me when I'm 64?"
No.
" crawling on her hands and knees whilst dragging her wheelchair, crutches "
What?,.....she couldn't use the crutches or wheelchair? Why was she "crawling on her hands and knees? instead of using the crutches or wheelchair?
I don't get it.
Heather Mills...Anna Nicole Smith....John Forbes Kerry....what's the difference?
Her slanderous claims sound more like a scornful ex-witch trying ruin Paul's good name.
Subjected her to four violent attacks, including one in which he stabbed her in the arm with a broken wine glass.
Did she takes pictures of her injuries; did she call the cops.
This divorce is really going to cost him an 'arm and a leg'
So much for Mellow Yellow.
When I get older, losing my hair, many years from now,
Will you still be sending me a Valentine, birthday greetings, bottle of wine?
If I'd been out 'till quarter to three,would you lock the door?
Will you still need me, will you still feed me,
When I'm sixty-four?
Hmm------mmm---mmmh.
You'll be older, too. Aaah, and if you say the word, I could stay with you.
I could be handy, mending a fuse, when your lights have gone.
You can knit a sweater by the fireside, Sunday mornings, go for a ride.
Doing the garden, digging the weeds, who could ask for more?
Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty four?
Every summer we can rent a cottage in the Isle of Wightif it's not to dear. We shall scrimp and save.
Ah, grandchildren on your knee, Vera, Chuck, and Dave.
Send me a postcard, drop me a line stating point of view.
Indicate precisely what you mean to say, yours sincerely wasting away.
Give me your answer, fill in a form, mine forever more.
Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty four?
I wasn't there, and neither was anyone else on this forum.
My question: is there a possibility these things really did happen?
The answer is yes.
Star Wars, Episode IV: The Macca Strikes Back
Regards, Ivan