Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

another male predator preys on defenseless younger woman!

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bogey666



Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:51 pm    Post subject: another male predator preys on defenseless younger woman! Reply with quote

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29760888/?gt1=43001


Wife divorcing ex-CEO: $43 million not enough
36-year-old Swedish countess says she needs more than $53,000 a week

updated 6:20 p.m. ET March 18, 2009
HARTFORD, Conn. - A 36-year-old Swedish countess divorcing a former CEO says she cannot live on $43 million.

Marie Douglas-David, a former investment banker, says she has no income and needs her 67-year-old husband, George David, to pay her more than $53,000 a week � more than most U.S. households make in a year � to cover her expenses.

David stepped down last year as chief executive at Hartford-based United Technologies Corp. but is still chairman of the board and has an estimated net worth of $329 million. He and his wife accuse each other of extramarital affairs. Their divorce trial started Wednesday

"I'm just very sad that we are where we are," Douglas-David said. "I hope we resolve this soon so everybody can move on with their lives."

David briefly took the stand Wednesday. Asked if his marriage is irretrievably broken, he simply answered, "Yes."

Marriage was in trouble by 2004
David and Douglas-David married in 2002, but the marriage was in trouble by 2004, court papers show. Amid a series of reconciliations, the couple signed a postnuptial agreement in October 2005 that would give her $43 million when they divorce.

Douglas-David wants the agreement invalidated. She accused her husband of coercing her to sign it by preying upon her fears of being divorced and childless.

David is asking a judge to uphold the agreement. His attorneys asked for a separate hearing Wednesday on the document's validity, but the judge declined.

Douglas-David has filed court papers showing she has more than $53,800 in weekly expenses, including for maintaining a Park Avenue apartment and three residences in Sweden. Her weekly expenses also include $700 for limousine service, $4,500 for clothes, $1,000 for hair and skin treatments, $1,500 for restaurants and entertainment, and $8,000 for travel.

At that rate, Douglas-David would burn through $43 million in less than 16 years. The Census Bureau estimates that the median U.S. household income in 2007 was just over $50,000.

Anne Dranginis, an attorney for David and retired Connecticut Appellate Court judge, predicted that Douglas-David will get much less money in the divorce if she doesn't accept the terms of the postnuptial.

Wife quit her job as investment banker
In court papers, Douglas-David said she quit her job as an investment banker for Lazard Asset Management to travel and entertain with David, who still earns $1 million a year from United Technologies. While chief executive in 2007, David made nearly $27 million in salary and bonuses.

Douglas-David's legal team includes prominent New York divorce attorney William Beslow, who represented Mia Farrow in her child-custody suit against actor-director Woody Allen and Marla Maples in her divorce from Donald Trump.

United Technologies is the parent company of Carrier, which makes air conditioning units, and Otis Elevators. It also owns Sikorsky, which makes commercial and military helicopters, and Hamilton Sunstrand, an aerospace manufacturer that makes components for NASA's space program.

David is expected to return to the stand Thursday for several days of testimony.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bluelake



Joined: 01 Dec 2005

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cue Green Acres music...

Quote:
Douglas-David has filed court papers showing she has more than $53,800 in weekly expenses, including for maintaining a Park Avenue apartment and three residences in Sweden. Her weekly expenses also include $700 for limousine service, $4,500 for clothes, $1,000 for hair and skin treatments, $1,500 for restaurants and entertainment, and $8,000 for travel.


1. Sell the places on Park Avenue and in Sweden. Go live in the 'burbs.

2. Buy a Kia and learn how to drive.

3. Walmart has nice fashions.

4. Even Bill Clinton didn't pay that much.

5. A night at the Olive Garden and a movie theatre will cost a lot less.

6. The Greyhound monthly bus pass and staying at Motel 6 will save a lot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aboxofchocolates



Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind

PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, I feel really sorry for that ridiculously rich man who married a woman young enough to be his daughter (if he waited to have children, that is). Trolling again, bogey666?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bogey666



Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone

PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aboxofchocolates wrote:
Wow, I feel really sorry for that ridiculously rich man who married a woman young enough to be his daughter (if he waited to have children, that is). Trolling again, bogey666?


hi boxo, this was more in the direction of jkelly who recently claimed all older men with younger women were de facto "predators".

I suggested he was confused as to who the "predator" was. This is merely proof.

hey, she didn't have to marry him. He was dumb of course.... but he established his loss (43 million or whatever it was) very early on, and that loss wouldn't affect his overall wealth and or lifestyle. His right.

what's truly scary is she's not a particularly striking woman.

http://images.nymag.com/daily/intel/20081219_mddavid_250x375.jpg

not ugly, but not even worth a million much less 43 million.

Now imagine how many rounds he could have with Spitzer's hooker at several hundred a pop... I'd bet you it would have cost him less with her, a significantly hotter woman per sexual encounter than it did with Ms. Swedish countess or whatever she is/was.

anywas- I'm not quite sure what YOUR point is, here, boxo???

are you suggesting he got what he "deserved" because he married a woman much younger than him? By the time he married her, she was 30, certainly no "spring chicken" and quite mature in every sense.

yes, I think he's a complete idiot, - BUT - as I noted, he established his "loss". Apparently the breaking of the prenup in your "interesting" logic is also well deserved by Mr. David's "sin". ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aboxofchocolates



Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind

PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bogey666 wrote:
aboxofchocolates wrote:
Wow, I feel really sorry for that ridiculously rich man who married a woman young enough to be his daughter (if he waited to have children, that is). Trolling again, bogey666?


hi boxo, this was more in the direction of jkelly who recently claimed all older men with younger women were de facto "predators".

I suggested he was confused as to who the "predator" was. This is merely proof.

hey, she didn't have to marry him. He was dumb of course.... but he established his loss (43 million or whatever it was) very early on, and that loss wouldn't affect his overall wealth and or lifestyle. His right.

what's truly scary is she's not a particularly striking woman.

http://images.nymag.com/daily/intel/20081219_mddavid_250x375.jpg

not ugly, but not even worth a million much less 43 million.

Now imagine how many rounds he could have with Spitzer's hooker at several hundred a pop... I'd bet you it would have cost him less with her, a significantly hotter woman per sexual encounter than it did with Ms. Swedish countess or whatever she is/was.

anywas- I'm not quite sure what YOUR point is, here, boxo???

are you suggesting he got what he "deserved" because he married a woman much younger than him? By the time he married her, she was 30, certainly no "spring chicken" and quite mature in every sense.

yes, I think he's a complete idiot, - BUT - as I noted, he established his "loss". Apparently the breaking of the prenup in your "interesting" logic is also well deserved by Mr. David's "sin". ?


Hmm, fighting for the money in court? Fair game. Would I do it? Hells no. Would I marry an older man for his money? Hells no. Man got a wife who was far too young for him and any reasonable individual would know she married for money with that kind of a prenup. If courts decide it is just to give her more money, I will be very suprised and confused, but \i will assume there is more at play than I am aware of, and the media is playing on our society's love-hate relationship with the femme fatale figure. I don't think old men need to marry hot women for their looks and young women don't need to marry rich men for their money, but I don't write the rules and \i don't really want to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bogey666



Joined: 17 Mar 2008
Location: Korea, the ass free zone

PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aboxofchocolates wrote:
bogey666 wrote:
aboxofchocolates wrote:
Wow, I feel really sorry for that ridiculously rich man who married a woman young enough to be his daughter (if he waited to have children, that is). Trolling again, bogey666?


hi boxo, this was more in the direction of jkelly who recently claimed all older men with younger women were de facto "predators".

I suggested he was confused as to who the "predator" was. This is merely proof.

hey, she didn't have to marry him. He was dumb of course.... but he established his loss (43 million or whatever it was) very early on, and that loss wouldn't affect his overall wealth and or lifestyle. His right.

what's truly scary is she's not a particularly striking woman.

http://images.nymag.com/daily/intel/20081219_mddavid_250x375.jpg

not ugly, but not even worth a million much less 43 million.

Now imagine how many rounds he could have with Spitzer's hooker at several hundred a pop... I'd bet you it would have cost him less with her, a significantly hotter woman per sexual encounter than it did with Ms. Swedish countess or whatever she is/was.

anywas- I'm not quite sure what YOUR point is, here, boxo???

are you suggesting he got what he "deserved" because he married a woman much younger than him? By the time he married her, she was 30, certainly no "spring chicken" and quite mature in every sense.

yes, I think he's a complete idiot, - BUT - as I noted, he established his "loss". Apparently the breaking of the prenup in your "interesting" logic is also well deserved by Mr. David's "sin". ?


Hmm, fighting for the money in court? Fair game. Would I do it? Hells no. Would I marry an older man for his money? Hells no. Man got a wife who was far too young for him and any reasonable individual would know she married for money with that kind of a prenup. If courts decide it is just to give her more money, I will be very suprised and confused, but \i will assume there is more at play than I am aware of, and the media is playing on our society's love-hate relationship with the femme fatale figure. I don't think old men need to marry hot women for their looks and young women don't need to marry rich men for their money, but I don't write the rules and \i don't really want to.


I'd be happy to support you for a benevolent empress dictatorship post boxo, if you ran on a platform of prohibiting marriages to significantly older and wealthier "partners"...

but I'm afraid you would get killed by the women's vote Laughing

the trading of v.a.g.i.n.a.s. for $$$ has been going on since the first caveman communities (of course at that point it may have been puss for food) and "marriage" was simply the way to make it "socially respectable" - as opposed to the more honest practice of prostitution.

my guess is the "social respect" comes from the woman getting a LOT more money for a LOT longer period of time Very Happy

and you know how women love to talk about the getting the milk from the cow story??? in warning other women not to give the milk away "for free"???


Shocked Shocked


this is my FAVORITE part of the story. It speaks for itself:

Quote:
Marriage was in trouble by 2004
David and Douglas-David married in 2002, but the marriage was in trouble by 2004, court papers show. Amid a series of reconciliations, the couple signed a postnuptial agreement in October 2005 that would give her $43 million when they divorce.

Douglas-David wants the agreement invalidated. She accused her husband of coercing her to sign it by preying upon her fears of being divorced and childless.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aboxofchocolates



Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind

PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, yes, it sounds pretty ridiculous to me too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International