FAMILY COURTS 17

'When you divorce you become poor': What ex-wife said after she was 'awarded 80% of his property'
A millionaire building tycoon says he has been left 'homeless' by a divorce ruling he says handed 80% of the family property to his ex-wife.

Construction magnate David Stocker, 61, was used to living the high life during his marriage to former wife Avril, 62. They had a five-bedroom home in West London valued at £1million, a £100,000 yacht and a £500,000 villa in Spain.

But he told an Appeal Court hearing that his life of luxury is over and he is now unable to get back on the London property ladder because of the couple's divorce. After the hearing she denied feeling like a winner, saying: 'When you get divorced, you become poor.'

He said a divorce court ruling left his ex-wife with property worth £1.8million - more than seven times his own £250,000 share. Mr Stocker argued that the division of assets was 'unfair', especially as his former wife has no children to care for. Despite his pleas, senior judge Mr Justice Blake told him he must accept his new lot, finding there was nothing legally wrong with the original ruling.

The court heard a family judge had handed four-fifths of the £2million-plus family assets to his ex-wife after their 15-year marriage ended in 2011. The divorce ruling came in 2013. Mr Stocker said he had been obliged to sell his boat - which he valued at £100,000 - and to hand over the keys to the former matrimonial home in Ruislip, north-west London. The building boss, whose business is based in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, was also told to split the Spanish villa - which he valued at more than £500,000 - with his ex-wife.

Mr Stocker, representing himself in court, told Mr Justice Blake he was baffled by the decision, saying: 'We have got no kids - why is it not 50/50?' He told the judge: 'My wife got a £1m house in Ruislip, half a villa that's worth hundreds of thousands more. My wife got £1.8m in property and I'm left with £250,000. 'I'm entitled to a home under human rights. I told the judge throughout the case that all I wanted was a home out of it,' he went on.

He said he was no longer fielding a barrister in the divorce battle, which has been running for four years, because 'I ran out of money'. 'The assets have 80% gone her way. All I'm asking for is a home,' he added.

Mr Justice Blake however told Mr Stocker that he had no hope of overturning the divorce ruling and would have to accept his reduced circumstances. 'Unfortunately, as happens so often in this type of litigation, everything here has the appearance of an applicant who refuses to have a sense of finality', he said. 'This court doesn't sit as a re-hearing court. You don't just come here and say, "Can we start all over again please?". The judge concluded: 'The husband argues that the division of the marital assets was unfair and disproportionate.

'This was a case in which there were no children to be taken into account, the husband contends that a 50/50 split would have been appropriate. 'But none of the matters he raises constitutes a basis for appeal which has any prospect of success.' Mr Stocker vowed to fight on as he left court.

Mrs Stocker, who attended the hearing and sat at the back of the court throughout, said later that she didn't feel like she had come out of the marriage a winner. 'When you get divorced, you become poor... the only people who have won out of all this are the lawyers,' she said. She added that she and her ex-husband had known each other since the early 1980s, having met at a squash club, and married in 1994.

Defending her payout, she said she had worked hard during the marriage to make the family construction company a success. 'I'm an intelligent person and I've got a masters degree from a good business school,' she added.

Of her high-flying former life whilst married to Mr Stocker, she said: 'We had a very good lifestyle. People used to say to me 'You've got everything.'' 'It's very sad. We had a long relationship, but all relationships are fraught. I'm very philosophical now, but it was a very hurtful time.'

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Divorce terrorism
    The lawyer controlled mass media rants endlessly about every conceivable terrorist threat or what they perceive as a threat across the planet. But the stats prove that those supposed terrorist threats have a .000000000000000000000001% chance of impacting on men's lives. However the very legal terrorists that control terrorist type propaganda have a more than 99.999999999999999999999% chance of destroying mens lives yet virtually nothing of that threat appears in their controlled media.

    They rant that men are more likely to be affected by their pseudo terrorism when much of what is promoted is actually a middle east uprising against the zionist / masonic hold that threatens men across that region as it has done for decades across the West. Middle eastern men see the damage being done to western men on the back of a feminist agenda with the zionist / freemason mafia conjuring up laws supposedly to protect women when it is to line their pockets from the destruction of men's lives using ex wives as the incentive and excuse for their vast criminality .

    When Bush and Blair triggered chaos across the Middle East for their zionist backers lawyer Blair was ranting about domestic violence and how it affected women in Britain yet despite his concern for those women was happy to help warmongering Bush drop bombs across Iraq killing thousands of women and children. So the hypocritical bastards that use the law to line their pockets on the back of feminism ignore feminism when they want to blow up a country for its resources and to further the zionist / masonic plans to destroy men in the very areas they claim terrorism operates but NOT their own form of terrorism in the regions that either except their agenda or be destroyed. One look across the Middle east shows the punishment they met out for resisting the zionist / masonic plans to control men not part of their satanic cult.

    ALL OF IT A SMOKESCREEN FOR THEIR OWN NWO PLANS.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Red Feminism: Communism and the Making of Women's Liberation
  • Gold digging ex Kathleen Wyatt is a disgrace to women
    Why should sponging ex wife have the right to money from husband she was only married to for two years, 30 years ago

    A huge injustice happened on Wednesday. Of course, it won’t have been the only one committed that day, but it has to qualify as one of the most ludicrous. You know that saying “the law’s an ass”? Well, in this case the judge was also an arse.

    And the ruling has opened an enormous hole down which too many men might slip if they’ve ever been married, divorced ... and then got rich. On Wednesday Lord Justice Wilson decided that single, jobless, mum-of-four ­ Kathleen Wyatt , has the right to claim £1.9 million from her ex-husband, Dale Vince, despite being separated from him for 30 years. They were only married for two years before separating in the first place. So, anyone else would write it off as a mistake, wouldn’t they? Oh, in the meantime, her ex founded the green energy company ­Ecotricity and is now a multi-millionaire. Ha!

    Finally, in 2011, Ms Wyatt first lodged her claim . She claims she gave up her life to look after her four ­children, despite only one son, who now lives and works with his dad, being Mr Vince’s. He says he’ll fight the claim all the way, because there’s a principle at stake.

    Ms Wyatt says that she’s so poor she’s been travelling by bus from Monmouthshire to the court in London and has been sleeping in a bus station. Yet her legal representatives are none another than uber-pricey Mishcon De Reya used by, among others, Princess Diana and Heather Mills. Mr Vince has paid her bills as well as his own, which, so far, amount to more than £500,000. Would she have done any of this if he’d been jobless or low-paid?

    If she’s so poor, why doesn’t she get a job like most of us have to? Why should Mr Vince have to pay because she stayed at home to look after four children, three of whom, were not his? The world’s moved on in the last 30 years. Ms Wyatt hasn’t. She says she’s doing this for “women power”. In reality she’s a parasitic, pathetic disgrace to womankind. In the meantime I’m switching to Ecotricity before Googling my 1980s boyfriends to see if they’ve become multi-millionaires.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • English judges show lunatic tendencies to allow case to continue with ex-wife demanding money 20 years after divorce (Open season for golddiggers)
  • Family court judge suspended for refusing to allow homosexuals to adopt child VIDEO
    Ex-wife of racehorse surgeon told to get a job and stop sponging off her former husband
    Tracey Wright, the ex-wife of a millionaire racehorse surgeon had the shock of her life last week when a judge bluntly told her she has no right to be supported for life by her former husband.

    Instead Tracey, a former riding instructor who gave up work to bring up her two children, was told “get a job”. Ian and Tracey split up in 2008 after 11 years of marriage. But the judge believes divorcees with children over the age of seven should not be dependant for ever on their former spouses and ought to work for a living.

    Tracey is not happy with the ruling. She claims she’s been made to feel like a criminal for putting her kids first. So who has the moral high ground on this one?

    Well, while I totally understand her wish to raise her two children by giving them her full-time care and attention, there does come a time to say men (even millionaires) shouldn’t be seen as a meal ticket for life. Tracey was receiving £75,000 a year from her ex-husband. But he claims he can’t continue to pay that amount when he retires. A fair point. And Tracey, what’s wrong in getting out and earning your own dosh? Women have rightly fought for equality but we can’t have it all our own way. With rights come responsibilities. Being married to a millionaire gave you a good lifestyle and you don’t see why that should be compromised because you are no longer husband and wife.

    But surely your pride should tell you it is time to set your kids a good example and get back to work so you can pay your way? With the maintenance you will still get from their father you can afford to pay for good after-school child care. And you might actually get a sense of pride and satisfaction in bringing home some money for the family pot. Being a “kept wife” isn’t really a job description. At 51, you still have a lot to give. And what better role model can your children have than a mum working and discovering a newfound sense of independence? Times have changed.

    Men and women have a right to equality. But both have a part to play in contributing to the most important possession they share – their children. Tracey has been a hands-on mum while her two were growing up. She gave them her best while, presumably, their dad was working long hours and weekends. That was her choice.

    But now it’s time to stop being dependant on the cash flow from her ex-husband and to get back to work. Who knows – she might even gain new self-respect and find she actually enjoys it?

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Judicial mafia under pressure now state ex-wives have no right to be “supported for life”
    WHY should any woman, who does not want to be married, still expect to have ALL the financial advantages of being married after they get a divorce? Lunatic judges and lawyers make this shit up as they go along so they can fleece the family.

    'She has no right to be supported for life': Judge tells ex-wife of millionaire racehorse vet to get a job in landmark divorce case

    A judge has told the ex-wife of a millionaire racehorse surgeon to get a job as she has no right to be “supported for life” by her former husband. Lord Justice Pitchford told mother of two Tracey Wright, 51, that divorcees with children aged over seven should work for a living. Leading divorce lawyers believe the ruling will have a significant impact on future big-money divorce cases.

    Mrs Wright, a former riding instructor and legal secretary who lives with her younger daughter, 10, chose not to work when she and vet Ian Wright divorced in 2008 after 11 years of marriage. Their £1.3?million seven-bedroom home was ordered to be sold and the proceeds split. Mrs Wright came away with a £450,000 mortgage-free house in Newmarket plus stabling for her horse and her daughters’ ponies. Mr Wright, 59, was also ordered to pay her and the children £75,000 a year in maintenance and school fees.

    Last year, he went to the High Court to seek a reduction in his bills, claiming that it was unfair to expect him to support his ex-wife indefinitely, even after he retires, while she made “no effort whatsoever to seek work”. A family court judge told Mrs Wright to “just get on with it” and find a job, like “vast numbers of other women with children”. Now Lord Justice Pitchford in the Court of Appeal has rejected her challenge to the decision to slash her future maintenance. Mr Wright runs an equine hospital in Newmarket that has carried out surgery on former Derby and Oaks winners. He and Mrs Wright separated in 2006.

    As part of the divorce order, Mrs Wright got £33,200 a year for her personal upkeep. The court heard that Mr Wright made the payments but was worried that supporting his wife would be unaffordable after he retires at 65. Judge Lynn Roberts last year agreed that there was no good reason why Mrs Wright had not done paid work since the divorce and criticised her for being “evasive” on her earning capacity. She said: “I do not think the children will suffer if Mrs Wright has to work, and indeed a working mother at this stage of their lives may well provide them with a good role model. It is possible to find work that fits in with childcare responsibilities. I reject her other reasons relating to responsibilities for animals, or trees, or housekeeping.”

    The judge ordered that her personal maintenance payments must cease, with a tailing-off over a five-year period leading up to Mr Wright’s retirement. Upholding Judge Roberts’s ruling, Lord Justice Pitchford confirmed that it is now “imperative that the wife go out to work and support herself”. “The time had come to recognise that, at the time of his retirement, the husband should not be paying spousal maintenance.” He added: “There is a general expectation that, once children are in year two, mothers can begin part-time work and make a financial contribution”. Leading divorce lawyers believe the ruling will have a significant impact on future big money divorce cases.

    Elizabeth Hicks, a partner and family law expert at Irwin Mitchell, said the decision was the latest “where single judges have made it plain that spousal maintenance is no longer a meal ticket for life. The fact that it is a decision on Appeal gives it greater weight.” Ayesha Vardag, President of Vardags, said: “This reflects a shift in the zeitgeist towards mothers being expected to get back into the workplace after divorce.

    “In a needs case, there's no gravy train for life. The reality is that parents work now, male and female, and everyone's supposed to pull their weight as soon as possible. “Unless the family's swimming in millions, the luxury of the stay-at-home Mummy is fast being confined to history.”

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Man divorces wife after taking this innocent looking picture on return from work

    Can you see why?
    Mass theft of children by Britain's masonic legal mafia VIDEO
    LAWYER driven 'Cohabiting Law' condemned by even a TOP family court judge
    The political and legal mafia behind law that would provide a new source of lucrative earnings for the legal fat cats

    Cohabiting couples should not be given 'married' rights because it sends out the wrong message, says top family court judge

    Cohabiting couples should never be allowed legal rights over each other’s money and property, one of Britain’s most senior family law experts said yesterday. Giving them the same rights as married couples would be naive and send out the wrong message, said retired High Court judge Sir Paul Coleridge. His intervention comes amid fresh attempts – backed by many judges and lawyers – to push a law through Parliament setting out legal entitlements for those in live-in relationships.

    He said any law designed to give special rights to just one section of the population would be a mistake. And he criticised politicians – including Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg – who support a new law for ‘giving the impression that marriage doesn’t matter’. Sir Paul, who heads the Marriage Foundation think-tank, is the first senior judge to come out strongly against any cohabitation law. He had once supported such a move, he said, as it would protect women left penniless after the breakdown of a long live-in relationship.

    But yesterday he told the Daily Mail: ‘I have had a Damascene conversion. I used to be quite in favour of some form of legal protection. ‘But I have drawn away from a cohabitation law. It is a naive, lawyer-driven idea, and some leadership is needed.’ Sir Paul, who retired in April but still presides in the occasional family case, said that giving legal rights to cohabitees would be a signal of official approval of such relationships. ‘You have to look at the bigger picture,’ he said.

    ‘There are nearly two million children of these relationships and they are at a disadvantage because of that. I think that is fully established now. The Government should be unequivocal in its support for marriage. Half of all family litigation is a matter of family breakdown among the unmarried. ‘That means 20 per cent of the population but 50 per cent of family court workload. Can you imagine the effect on the courts if there is legislation to give rights to cohabitees?’ Sir Paul said the debate on changing the law had overshadowed arguments about the need to strengthen marriage and called for more attention to be paid to ‘the terrible problem of family breakdown and the divisions it is creating in society’. ‘People think marriage is for the likes of them, it’s not for us. This is not helped by people like Nick Clegg and others who give the impression that marriage doesn’t matter and all relationships are the same.’

    Sir Paul’s intervention comes as much of the legal profession and many politicians have been trying to build support for a cohabitation law. The most senior family law judge, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby, said in October that the lack of legal protection for cohabitees ‘is an injustice which has been recognised as long as I have been in the law’. He said: ‘Reform is desperately needed. Reform is inevitable. How many more women are to be condemned to injustice in the meantime?’

    Liberal Democrat peer Lord Marks has tabled a Bill in the Lords that would give cohabiting partners rights after they had lived together for two years or after they have had children. That would see a cohabitee entitled to a share of the money, property and pension of their former partner in the event of a break-up. Lawyers have been calling for such a law for of years.

    However, critics point out that it would provide a new source of lucrative earnings for the legal profession. David Cameron rejected the idea of a cohabitation law shortly after the Coalition took power in 2010. There are nearly three million cohabiting couples in the country, with numbers rising.

    However, such relationships typically last only a third as long as the average marriage. And evidence also shows that children of cohabitees are less wealthy, less healthy and less likely to do well at school. Critics blame the rise of cohabitation for the increasing number of children in one-parent families.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Domestic abuse industry gives feminists / legal mafia the excuse to entitlement


    Much bigger than the Military Industrial Complex is the Divorce Industrial Complex and like the chant 'THEY HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION' made by LAWYER scumbag Blair as lapdog to Daddy Bush the legal mafia have their own vile chant about 'DOMESTIC VIOLENCE who like the victims of the CIA \ MI5 torture campaigns MEN during divorce get their own form of persecution and torture.

    There is no more torturous a path than the invisible psychological / financial torture inflicted by a global freemason mafia using their disturbing laws and allegations to rob men of their homes, assets and children. NO ONE would believe these evil bastards could also then place those children, ESPECIALLY boys, into care homes were a bunch of vile homopaedo's can access those boys for their own sick psychotic sexual deviancy.

    Guantanamo shows the lengths the supposed land of the free will go to impose their warmongering agenda, using patsies to enforce their global murderous agenda on the public blaming innocent victims as the stooges for the tyranny of Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney that let them bomb the women and children in the Middle East while they claim their legal systems are PROTECTING women and children this while they murder millions under the guise of a global police state.

    America's sheeple are waking up to the brutality of the hired MASONIC thugs masquerading as law enforcement as will Britain when they find out the lengths these monsters will go to destroy men they fleece using the manufactured DOMESTIC ABUSE laws that help enrich the freemason judges and lawyers on behalf of a vile crown only to happy to see those men homeless, penniless and childless that still to this day remains protected by their controlled media. That same media who protected predatory paedo's like the BBC's Jimmy Savile for over 40 years while they smear the very men whose children have been taken into care to satisfy these sick psychopaths appetite for stolen children.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • A lawyer "embellished" claims for legal aid in family court cases for £2 million accusing fathers of abusing their children later committed suicide after the police began investigating
  • LEGAL AID CHIEF ARRESTED WITH RENT BOY IN SHOPPING CENTRE TOILET
  • "TORTURE IS WRONG! IT IS UN-AMERICAN!" Senator Heinrich (VIDEO)
  • Those charged with dealing with domestic abuse are the biggest abusers of all
  • UK ‘completely involved at every level’ in CIA torture tactics(VIDEO)
  • Growing tensions in America over cop brutality, racial profiling(VIDEO)
  • Michael Mukasey Bush's Attorney General claims TORTURE isn't TORTURE(VIDEO)
  • CIA Director tries to defend their torture tactics(VIDEO)
  • Britain's homopaedo establishment used freemason cops and special branch to hide their sinister debauchery
  • Labour peer Barbara Castle drew up dossier on VIP homopaedo's
  • Mass arrest of 660 British homopaedo's included ex-cops
  • Two Scots in Thatcher gov Nicholas Fairbairn and Dr Alistair Smith accused of homopaedo abuse of boys
  • Margaret Thatcher 'personally covered up' for homopaedo senior ministers
  • Deputy child commissioner wants family courts to stay secret
    sue berelowitz Opening up family courts 'will cause child suicides': Fury at claim by children's tsar in secret justice battle

    Children will be pushed into committing suicide if the secretive family courts are opened to public scrutiny, a senior government official has sensationally claimed. Deputy Children's Commissioner Sue Berelowitz said children will kill themselves if they believe their names and their troubled lives will become known to the public.

    In a controversial speech calling for the courts to stay closed, she said: 'I have worked closely with profoundly distressed and damaged and troubled children all my working life. I know and understand their minds; it is my job. I know how little it takes to tip a child over the edge.' The remarks were greeted with astonishment and disbelief by campaigners for open justice.

    One said: 'I don't know what planet this woman is on.' High Court judge Sir Roderick Newton, who spoke alongside Miss Berelowitz in a legal debate on whether the courts and their decisions should be reported in the media, said family courts should be open to scrutiny. He said: 'To put it rather bluntly, if a judge can change the whole of someone's life by the stroke of a pen, then there is a pressing need, an overwhelming need, I would say, for openness.'

    During her address, Miss Berelowitz broke a widely observed media rule and described a common means of suicide. She added: 'I genuinely fear that it is only a matter of time before this deeply misguided motion, which has at its heart, I believe, an utter disregard for the welfare and best interests of children, and is, in my view, therefore unlawful, will result in the death of a child.' It is not the first time Miss Berelowitz has made controversial comments. During her career in child protection:

    - She was a director of children's services for a local council rated 'inadequate' by inspectors;

    - She produced a report on gang sex abuse of children which said there was no evidence that Asian men were responsible. One government figure said it was 'difficult to overstate the contempt' with which ministers viewed it;

    - One of her first public statements as Deputy Children's Commissioner was to respond to the outcry over the death of Baby P. She said 'the safeguarding of children requires the implementation of basic good practice'.

    Miss Berelowitz also warned that the Children's Commissioner would protest to the UN children's rights committee over the issue of openness in family courts. Her intervention comes amid an ongoing dispute among judges, lawyers and social workers over how far the family courts should be opened. A major push for openness has been launched by the chief family law judge, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby, who chaired last month's debate in London, at which Miss Berelowitz set down the first publicly acknowledged official opposition to allowing scrutiny of the family courts. The speeches were published yesterday.

    Sir Roderick was at the centre of a scandal last year when courts secretly ordered that Italian woman Alessandra Pacchieri should undergo a forced caesarean after suffering a breakdown at Stansted Airport, and that her child should be adopted. Sir Roderick was the judge who ordered the adoption. He said: 'In the Italian case . . . the reporting initially was pretty inaccurate. That wasn't necessarily the fault of the Press who had little or nothing to go on when the story was first sent to them. When I released my judgment on December 2, it led to a much better discussion. 'What the Italian case did was well and truly launch a comprehensive national discussion about how these sensitive issues can and should be addressed.

    'If a system is constantly accused of being secret, biased and unaccountable, the children in whose name we try to make the best decisions are the ones that ultimately will feel undermined.' Miss Berelowitz's suicide warning was greeted with amazement among campaigners for open justice and media figures. Lib Dem MP John Hemming said: 'I don't know what planet this woman is on. If the media had not looked at the abuse of children in care, the events in Rotherham would never have been known.'

    Bob Satchwell of the Society of Editors said: 'No-one in the media wants to expose details about children unless there are exceptional reasons to do so. It is strange that Miss Berelowitz uses emotional language when media organisations would be extremely careful in discussing matters like that to prevent copycat actions.' Campaigners for greater openness are not calling for children to be identified in family proceedings. In cases in which proceedings can be reported, identifying children would be contempt of court, for which reporters or editors could go to jail.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • A warning to American men about state powers over child support VIDEO


    On March 14, 2008, defendant Kenneth Pickett was found to be in contempt of this Court's child support order. As a condition of his four month purge and to avoid serving four days in jail, Mr. Pickett was ordered to seek work at five different employers per week, and to report his efforts to the prosecutor at least every two weeks. Upon employment, he was ordered to pay $260 per month, an amount that included payments toward current support and past arrearages. At the June 06, 2008 purge hearing, Assistant Prosecutor David Hitsman reported that there was no evidence of Mr. Pickett attempting to seek work, and no payments had been made. Mr. Pickett brought approximately 17% of the four month total to the purge hearing.
    Scot Young dead: Ex-wife of bankrupt tycoon hired PI to pursue him for money just weeks ago
    The media distracting attention away from the crooked lawyers and judges, operating on behalf of the biggest terror group on the planet the FREEMASON controlled Law Society who persecute men caught up in the divorce trap.

    Michelle Young employed fraud investigator Simon Sutton even though her former husband Scot Young had claimed he was being hounded to the point of madness

    The ex-wife of a bankrupt tycoon who plunged to his death from his £3million luxury flat hired a controversial private detective to pursue him for money just weeks ago.

    Michelle Young employed fraud investigator Simon Sutton, according to the Daily Mail, even though her former husband Scot Young had claimed he was being hounded to the point of madness. Property millionaire Young, 52, plunged four floors to his death. Fire crews used an angle grinder to cut the bars and free his impaled body. The tragedy followed years of wrangling about Young’s mysterious finances in one of the most bitter divorce cases seen in a British court.

    During the case it was alleged that Mrs Young, now 49, had used eight private detectives to try to prove her husband, 52, had hidden his immense fortune from her. Mr Young said at the time that being followed persistently made him ‘paranoid’ and eventually led to him being sectioned under the Mental Health Act. Mrs Young employed Nevyan Intelligence Services to renew attempts to track down funds she believed her former husband had hidden from her.

    The company is run by Mr Sutton, 43, an Oxford graduate who claims to have more than 20 years’ experience in fraud and corruption investigations across Europe, Asia, Western Africa, the Middle East and the Caribbean. Mr Sutton has had a series of failed companies and Nevyan is rated as ‘high risk’, having faced two county court judgements over debts amounting to £4,665. Last night, Mr Sutton told the Daily Mail: ‘I am not in a position to talk about the case. I am sorry, I can’t discuss it.’ Mrs Young declined to comment on Mr Sutton’s involvement in the case.

    Michelle Young

    It’s understood police will look at his private life and complex business dealings as part of the investigation into Young's death. Scotland Yard quickly said they were not treating the tragedy as suspicious, but a friend who visited the scene in London to lay flowers questioned whether dad-of-two Young would have taken his own life. He told reporters: “We don’t know if it was suicide yet.”

    Young’s girlfriend, model and reality TV star Noelle Reno, 30, said: “I am distraught by the sudden loss of my best friend.” Ex-wife Michelle, 50, who spent more than six years chasing Young through the courts for hundreds of millions of pounds, said: “I am too upset to speak at the moment. “I just have to look after my children and make sure they are OK. It is a very difficult time for us all. We have been to hell and back.”

    Young fell shortly after 5pm on Monday from a window of the split-level penthouse he shared with Noelle in Montagu Square, Marylebone. A man working nearby said: “It was a horrific scene. The police were visibly shocked. One said it was the worst thing he’d seen on the job.” Another witness said: “The police covered the body but I could see he was on the spike. I could see his feet dangling. It was horrible.”

    Young spent his early years in a tenement flat in Dundee’s Clepington Street. His dad Duncan played for Dundee United. Duncan turned 76 the day before his son died. He and wife Betsy are understood to be on holiday in Spain and were unavailable for comment. Young left school at 16 with no qualifications and began building his property empire in the late 80s.

    He met Michelle in 1988. Her father, a successful businessman, helped him on the path to success. By the mid-90s, Young was worth hundreds of millions of pounds and counted Topshop tycoon Sir Philip Green and US President Bill Clinton among his friends. At one point, he and Michelle owned a £21million country house in Oxfordshire, six mansions in London’s exclusive Belgravia, a £3.5million home in Miami, a yacht in Monaco and two £700,000 Mercedes Gullwing cars. But the couple’s 11-year marriage fell apart in 2006.

    During the marathon divorce case, which dragged on through 65 hearings, Michelle described Young as a “fixer for the super-rich” and claimed high-profile friends in the business world had helped him hide assets of £2billion. But Young said in 2006 that he lost everything and went bankupt when a colossal property deal in Russia, dubbed Project Moscow, collapsed. One source claimed he had forged links with members of the Russian underworld. Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky was known to be an investor in the scheme. He was found hanged last year at his Berkshire mansion and an inquest recorded an open verdict.

    Young said the failure of Project Moscow left him almost £30million in debt. He claimed he could not afford to pay £27,500 a month in maintenance for Michelle and their daughters, Scarlet, 21, and Sasha, 19. Green and top restaurateur Richard Caring both told the court they had loaned Young five-figure sums.

    Young said he had been harassed by Michelle’s private detectives and had been suffering from a depressive illness. It later emerged he had been sectioned twice under the Mental Health Act. Michelle’s counsel, Edward Fitzgerald QC, dismissed the Scot’s pleas of poverty.

    He said Young seemed to be living a life “consistent with considerable wealth”, and added: “He is going from party to party with champagne glass in his hand and his current girlfriend, some supermodel or other, on his arm.” In January last year, Young was sentenced to six months and briefly jailed for refusing to give the court full details of his wealth. A judge called it a “flagrant and deliberate” contempt of court. The case was finally settled in November last year. Mr Justice Moor said he could only find assets of £45million for Young and ordered him to pay Michelle £20million within 28 days.

    Young was also told to pay £5million of his ex-wife’s £6million legal bill. She used 13 sets of lawyers and four sets of accountants during the case. The judge slammed both Young and Michelle over the bitterness of the case, saying they had failed to focus on their children. He said he felt “nothing but sympathy” for the two girls. Mr Justice Moor added: “Extremely serious allegations have been bandied around like confetti. In many respects, this is about as bad an example of how to litigate as I have encountered.”

    Michelle called the £20million award disgraceful, insisting: “He’s worth billions.” The court heard in March that none of the money had been paid, and the judge said he believed Young had hidden assets offshore. Noelle said Young was still haunted by the loss of his wealth. She said: “He still can’t deal with it. It’s been so traumatic for him.” Young had appeared with Noelle in reality show Ladies of London, screened on both sides of the Atlantic.

    They moved to Montagu Square, where Ringo Starr once lived, in July. Noelle said the penthouse was a “happy little home for our happy little life”. Police said after Young’s fall: “A man, believed to be in his early 50s, was pronounced dead at the scene. The death is not being treated as suspicious at this time.”

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Ex-wife of man driven to suicide during divorce claims SHE has been to hell and back
    This is NOT a one off there are men daily dying due to the extreme psychological pressures brought on by bitter ex-wives and golddiggers with a VAST ARRAY of crooked lawyers only to happy to spend years on legal aid fleecing, harassing and persecuting men and destroying their lives. ANY man who has been through this evil system will know the lengths Britain's freemason judicial mafia, assisted by bailiffs, social workers and cops, will go to persecute any man who does not bow to their criminal corrupt courts and judgements.

    The ex-wife of a tycoon involved in Britain’s most acrimonious divorce battle told of her “hell” today after he plunged to his death onto railings from his penthouse flat.

    Scot Young, 52, said to have made a £2 billion fortune as a fixer for the super rich, suffered horrific injuries after falling four storeys from the window of his £3 million rented home in Marylebone. The bankrupt property magnate’s death comes just over a year after he was jailed for six months at the conclusion of a bitter divorce battle with his ex-wife for refusing to reveal details of his wealth. Michelle Young, 49, who won a £20 million payout after the six year courtroom fight, said today she was with the couple’s two daughters after hearing the news of her ex-husband’s death saying: “We have been to hell and back.”

    The family had gathered at their flat in Victoria and Ms Young told the Standard: “I am too upset to speak at the moment I just have to look after my children and make sure they are OK. It is a very difficult time for us all.” A friend said: “She is obviously devastated and needs time to come to terms with this.”

    Mr Young, a friend of many leading British businessmen including Topshop billionaire Sir Philip Green and restaurateur Richard Caring, was found dead at 5pm on Monday, his body impaled on iron railings outside the duplex apartment in Montagu Square he shared with his 31-year-old American girlfriend Noelle Reno. Firefighters had to cut through the railings with an angle grinder to release the body. Police said they were not treating the death as suspicious. The couple moved into the flat in July and Ms Reno, a former model who stars in reality TV show Ladies of London alongside supermodel Caprice, said it would be a “happy little home, for our happy little life.”

    A spokesman for Ms Reno, who also writes a travel blog detailing holidays around the world, including one she took with Mr Young to Bali earlier this year, said she was too upset to comment. It is not clear if she was at home at the time of his death. Her most recent tweet, posted on December 7, said: “No matter what the day throws, I know I can handle it if my day starts with meditation (even if it’s day £4 of insane xmas parties!!)” Mr Young, the son of former Scottish Footballer Duncan Young, became hugely sucessful through a string of business and property deals and in 2006 had built up a £400 million fortune.

    He and his ex-wife enjoyed a string of lavish properties, including a nine-bedroom mansion in Oxfordshire and a £6 million beach house in Florida. The businessman travelled the world by private jet while the couple spent £5,000 on meals and enjoyed holidays on a £3 million yacht. Then by the end of 2006, as the couple began to grow apart, Mr Young claimed to have lost all his money in a financial “meltdown.”

    The couple separated in the same year after 11 years of marriage and became embroiled in a divorce battle with Ms Young claiming half his assets saying he was worth “a few billion pounds at least.” Young was ordered to hand his ex-wife £27,500 a month to pay rent and school fees for their two daughters in November 2012. But he claimed the collapse of a £2 billion property deal in Moscow had left him penniless and he was unable to make the payments.

    Ms Young contested the claim and Mr Young was jailed for six months at the High Court in January 2013 for what the judge called a “flagrant and deliberate” contempt of court. The judge Mr Justice Moor assessed Mr Young was worth £40 million and said Ms Young was entitled to half that sum. The judge described the litigation as ”quite extraordinary” saying that over six years Mrs Young had run up a legal bill of more than £6m and employed 13 sets of lawyers and four teams of accountants

    In May last year, Ms Young told the Evening Standard her former partner had attempted suicide and sought help at the Priory clinic at the time of their break-up. Mr Young claimed in court he had been “harassed” by private detectives and the long-running court battle had taken a heavy toll on his health. He was declared bakrupt in 2010. He said he recently had been “detained” in hospital under mental health legislation and had been unable to secure the services of a barrister.

    Neighbours in the exclusive Montagu Square, where Beatle’s drummer Ringo Starr once owned a flat, today told of their shock at Young’s death. One said: “He moved in with his girlfriend a few months ago, but they kept themselves to themselves. I only ever saw him once.” A leading divorce lawyer said Ms Young now faces a major litigation headache to recover what she claims to be her fair share of her husband’s wealth.

    Hannah Budd, a partner in The International Family Law Group LLP, said: “In light of Mr Young’s death Mrs Young will have claims against his estate under the Inheritance Act to provide for reasonable provision for her. “The real difficulty here will be identifying those assets which fall within the estate which was the crux of the issue on their divorce.

    “It may now become easier to unravel Mr Young’s financial affairs but the reality is that Mrs Young may be facing significant further litigation in order to do so.” In March this year the High Court heard that Ms Young had yet to see a penny of her £20 million settlement, three months after it was awarded by a judge.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Masonic psychopaths brutal attacks on men when ex-wives cry wolf
  • Family court judicial mafia's psychological/financial torture triggers another man to commit suicide
    Scot Young and his ex-wife Michelle Young who has been allowed by Britain's judicial mafia to drag divorce proceedings out for years that has wrecked his life. ONE of only thousands of men facing similar tyranny.

    Horror as Scots tycoon involved in bitter divorce battle dies after falling from £3m London home

    SCOT YOUNG, who had been involved in a bitter battle for cash with his ex-wife Michelle, landed on railings outside his home in Marylebone.

    He was embroiled in one of Britain’s most bitter divorces and died after falling from his home and impaling himself on iron railings. Scot Young, originally from Dundee, suffered horror injuries after plunging four storeys from a window of his central London penthouse. The 52-year-old’s lengthy divorce battle with his wife Michelle, 49, finally concluded last November at the city’s High Court.

    She won a £20million payout but declared the sum a “disgrace”, insisting her ex-husband, known as a “fixer for the super-rich”, was worth “billions”. At one point during the acrimonious court fight Mr Young was jailed for refusing to come clean on his true riches.

    His body was found by horrified residents in Marylebone on Monday afternoon. He had fallen 60ft on to the iron railings and police moved quickly to hide the distressing scene from onlookers. Firefighters had to cut through the railings with an angle grinder before the body could be removed.

    Neighbours said Mr Young had moved into the duplex apartment a few months ago with his American girlfriend Noelle Reno, 30. Gary Sutton 57, who was working nearby when Mr Young fell, said: “It was a horrific scene. The police were visibly shocked - one said it was the worst thing he had seen on the job. It was all very distressing.” Another witness said: “The police had covered the body but I could see from behind that he was on the spike because I could see his feet dangling towards the basement floor. It was horrible.”

    The three-bedroom property from which Mr Young fell is next door to the former home of Ringo Starr. Flats in the square sell for more than £3million and fetch rents of up to £8000 a month. Mr Young built up a substantial business empire and owned assets including a home in London, a £21million Oxfordshire mansion and residences around the globe.

    The son of a former Dundee United star, he was once said to be worth £400million and travelled the world by private jet. But he claimed to have suffered a financial catastrophe in the years after the end of his 17-year marriage to Mrs Young, with whom he had two children. After they separated in 2006, a bitter battle for cash began. Mr Young offered his wife a £300million settlement in 2009.

    But the next year he claimed he had been bankrupted by a disastrous deal and could not pay £27,500-a-month maintenance for his ex-wife and their daughters, Scarlet, 21, and Sasha, 19. Over the next five years, Mrs Young grappled for what she saw as her fair share of her ex-husband’s wealth.

    She demanded half his assets, claiming he was worth ‘a few billion pounds at least’ but had hidden his cash in a series of secret investments. In January last year, Mr Young was jailed for six months for refusing to disclose full details of his wealth to the court. Miss Reno, an entrepreneur and model who is originally from Seattle, stood by him after he was jailed. In an interview earlier this year, she said the loss of her partner’s wealth “kills him”. She added: “He still can’t deal with it. It has been so traumatic for him.” A spokesman for Miss Reno said she was too upset to speak about the tragedy.

    Handing down his ruling in the divorce case last November, Mr Justice Moor said he could find only £45million and ordered Mr Young to pay £20million within 28 days. He then launched an attack on the Youngs, saying he felt “nothing but sympathy” for their two children, and criticising the couple for failing to be “child-focused”. Mr Justice Moor said: “It is the most difficult financial remedy case I have ever come across. This case has been extraordinary even by the standards of the most bitter matrimonial breakdowns.

    “Extremely serious allegations have been bandied around like confetti. In many respects this is about as bad an example of how to litigate as I have encountered.” A Met Police spokesman said: “A man, believed to be aged in his early 50s, was pronounced dead at the scene. The death is not being treated as suspicious at this time.”

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Bankrupt Scots property tycoon dies after falling onto railing outside London property
    He said over the years Mrs Young had run up a legal bill of more than £6 million and employed 13 sets of lawyers and four teams of accountants. HOW MUCH OF THAT WAS PAID BY THE LEGAL AID BOARD AND THE BILL WOULD HAVE TO BE MET BY HER EX-HUSBAND?

    Mr Young, originally from Dundee, died on Monday evening, according to a spokeswoman for his girlfriend Noelle Reno.

    He is believed to have fallen onto railings outside a property in Montagu Square, Marylebone, central London. He is known for fighting a long legal battle with his estranged wife over a multi-million pound settlement. Police said his death was not being treated as suspicious.

    A spokesman for Scotland Yard said: "Police were called to Montagu Square, W1, at 17:18hrs on Monday, 8 December, to reports of a man having fallen from a fourth floor window. "A man, believed aged in his early 50's, was pronounced dead at the scene. "The death is not being treated as suspicious at this time." In March a High Court hearing was told Mr Young's estranged wife remained empty-handed more than three months after she was awarded £20 million by a judge. A lawyer representing Michelle Young told judge Mr Justice Moor there had been ''zero recoveries'' from Mr Young. In November last year, Mr Justice Moor assessed Mr Young to be worth £40 million - after analysing evidence at a trial - and said Mrs Young was entitled to half of that.

    The judge said Mr Young might have hidden assets off-shore and said he knew Mrs Young would find it hard to enforce his order, but he said Mr Young would never be free of the debt. Mrs Young said she thought Mr Young was worth ''billions'' and claimed he had hidden a ''vast fortune''. Mr Young said he had suffered a financial ''meltdown'' seven years ago and was bankrupt and penniless, with debts adding up to £28 million. The judge described the litigation - which began more than six years ago - as ''quite extraordinary''.

    He said over the years Mrs Young had run up a legal bill of more than £6 million and employed 13 sets of lawyers and four teams of accountants. The judge heard that the Youngs, who had two daughters, separated in 2006 after starting a relationship in 1989. Mr Young and his American girlfriend Ms Reno, who describes herself as a "fashion entrepreneur" on her Twitter profile, appeared together in reality show Ladies Of London. The programme is similar to the Real Housewives franchise and the final episode was aired earlier this month on ITVBe. The pair starred alongside model Caprice.

    During the series, which also starred socialite and businesswoman Caroline Stanbury and the late Alexander McQueen's muse Annabelle Neilson, Ms Reno referred to Mr Young's divorce battle and the press coverage of it. Cameras followed the couple as they viewed plush places to potentially rent in London as well as showing them in social situations with their co-stars. Ms Reno's most recent tweet, posted on December 7, said: "No matter what the day throws, I know I can handle it if my day starts with meditation (even if it's day #4 of insane xmas parties!!)"

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE