independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Divorce Records to be Unsealed per Judge
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 21 of 40 « First<171819202122232425>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #600 posted 08/17/16 12:39am

morningsong

Nothing to do now but wait. chair teapot coffee
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #601 posted 08/17/16 1:15am

wildgoldenhone
y

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

I want you all to know the ex-wife presented to the Judge copies of message-board posts and comments posted in the immediate aftermath of her divorce.


You know which message board comments she is talking about, eh?


You are now all part of the court record!




:falloff:

U KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS?

MANIA'S ON THE ORG!!

lol

Smile everybody! razz
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #602 posted 08/17/16 1:29am

wildgoldenhone
y

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:



XxAxX said:


^ did she mention her prior history as a fan who posted on just such message boards, establishing herself as part of the online presence she claims to have been harassed by?? just wondering



Well the Judge did point out "It notes that if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."


Ouch!

[Edited 8/16/16 19:08pm]



OUCH IS RIGHT! neutral

.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #603 posted 08/17/16 3:33am

Heidi

avatar

Why Mani's divorce papers and not unseal Mayte's ? Why not bother with Mayté's divorce papers ?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #604 posted 08/17/16 5:43am

XxAxX

avatar

XxAxX said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Well the Judge did point out "It notes that if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

Ouch!

[Edited 8/16/16 19:08pm]

oooo. slam.



important distinction between what the judge said and the "It" the judge refers to. "It notes that if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

the Judge did not say: "if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

"It" is the The Star Stribune. read the order., p.11 para 3

the Judge only points out that the Star Tribune made this point.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #605 posted 08/17/16 5:56am

Heidi

avatar

Correct. The judge simply agreed with the point made by ST. Which - let's be honest - is a fair point. I still think that ST are scum, but I'm wondering what are Mani's grounds to prevent the unsealing of documents? Is it to protect herself of him ?

.

She posted something on her FB about having PTSD - what's that about ?

.

And still, I'm wondering, why ST never tried to unseal the divorce papers from Mayté's divorce ?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #606 posted 08/17/16 6:14am

leadline

avatar

wildgoldenhoney said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

Well the Judge did point out "It notes that if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

Ouch!

[Edited 8/16/16 19:08pm]

OUCH IS RIGHT! neutral .


I agree that is true what the judge is saying, but her doing that should have no bearing whether these particular docs get released or not. That quote makes it seem like if that line never existed, she would have had a better shot at keeping her private life under wraps, when in reality, what she did with US Magazine and what is happening now should be mutually exclusive as it pertains to this case.

But like I said all along in this thread, she is protecting herself here and not Prince, she doesn't want the public to know why they got divorced, or, how much she received, or, was still receiving, in her settlement. I can understand that.

[Edited 8/17/16 6:15am]

"You always get the dream that you deserve, from what you value the most" -Prince 2013
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #607 posted 08/17/16 6:14am

XxAxX

avatar

Heidi said:

Correct. The judge simply agreed with the point made by ST. Which - let's be honest - is a fair point. I still think that ST are scum, but I'm wondering what are Mani's grounds to prevent the unsealing of documents? Is it to protect herself of him ?

.

She posted something on her FB about having PTSD - what's that about ?

.

And still, I'm wondering, why ST never tried to unseal the divorce papers from Mayté's divorce ?


definitely a fair point. she has made the most of her association with prince for many years now, using his celebrity status to augment her own wherever she can.

and if she is media shy, whyever was she on that episode of hollywood exes??? that alone could be considered guaranteed to generate a lot of unkind fan speculation.

i don't and never will follow her on FB so i don't know what she said about PTSD.

but, i'm aware from reading posts here that she's used internet fora herself to stab at prince over the years with off hand remarks she posts (prince, charlie sheen dig) and later deletes... so it's not like she even does that great a job of protecting her own privacy.

again, in my opinion the file should remain sealed to protect prince's privacy.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #608 posted 08/17/16 6:30am

rogifan

I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #609 posted 08/17/16 6:35am

destinyc1

http://www.people.com/peo...21,00.html I only remember this little article at the time and the US WEEKLY i believe.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #610 posted 08/17/16 6:43am

LuxLove

rogifan said:

I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?


yeahthat

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #611 posted 08/17/16 6:49am

Genesia

avatar

Manuela tried to have it both ways. The court didn't buy it. shrug

We don’t mourn artists because we knew them. We mourn them because they helped us know ourselves.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #612 posted 08/17/16 6:51am

destinyc1

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #613 posted 08/17/16 6:55am

rogifan

rogifan said:

I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?

Oh and I don't care how much people dislike Mani or whatever. Still doesn't make a case for unsealing this being in the public interest. It's just people being vindictive because they don't like someone.
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #614 posted 08/17/16 7:04am

Genesia

avatar

rogifan said:

rogifan said:
I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?
Oh and I don't care how much people dislike Mani or whatever. Still doesn't make a case for unsealing this being in the public interest. It's just people being vindictive because they don't like someone.


Seriously? Do you think the judge came to prince.org and said, "Man, people really don't like this woman. I better unseal the divorce records"?

Of course, that didn't happen. The decision is based on legal precedent. That's what all those "So-and-so vs. So-and-so citations" in the decision refer to. The relative popularities of the plaintiff and defendant have nothing to do with it.

We don’t mourn artists because we knew them. We mourn them because they helped us know ourselves.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #615 posted 08/17/16 7:06am

LuxLove

rogifan said:

rogifan said:
I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?
Oh and I don't care how much people dislike Mani or whatever. Still doesn't make a case for unsealing this being in the public interest. It's just people being vindictive because they don't like someone.


What winds me up about the hate for Manuela is that Prince would be fighting this too & even if she is out for herself she is protecting him by default & we should all be greatful for that. And I have loved him since I was 7 (though my dad insists it's actually since I was 4 cos he says I loved SOTT lol ) so that's 25 years & I do not believe PRINCE owes me anything or I have the right to know anything just because I bought his music & fancied the arse off him. He was a private person & he would be hating all this!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #616 posted 08/17/16 7:16am

PaisleyPrint

Camille10 said:

PurpleHeartBreak said:
My guess is since Manuela is worried about harassment, the documents will reveal that Prince did indeed carry the Pfieffer Syndrome gene.....that being the reason he did not want to try and have any more children. She wanted kids. That is just my guess, though. [Edited 8/15/16 12:22pm]
This is also my guess.

Why would he marry someone who wanted children and he didn't. That's one of the MAIN things discussed by couples before tying the knot. Doesn't make sense to me.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #617 posted 08/17/16 7:26am

Mumio

avatar

destinyc1 said:

http://pagesix.com/2011/0...xs-fiance/ REMEMBER THIS ARTICLE cool



Just checked that article out. Interesting, does anyone know why it was reported in the article that Prince cold-shouldered Diddy?

Welcome to "the org", Mumio…they can have you, but I'll have your love in the end nod
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #618 posted 08/17/16 7:35am

Mumio

avatar

Genesia said:

Seriously? Do you think the judge came to prince.org and said, "Man, people really don't like this woman. I better unseal the divorce records"?

Of course, that didn't happen. The decision is based on legal precedent. That's what all those "So-and-so vs. So-and-so citations" in the decision refer to. The relative popularities of the plaintiff and defendant have nothing to do with it.


Sorry, but this really cracked me up lol

Welcome to "the org", Mumio…they can have you, but I'll have your love in the end nod
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #619 posted 08/17/16 7:37am

malbena

Mumio said:

Genesia said:

Seriously? Do you think the judge came to prince.org and said, "Man, people really don't like this woman. I better unseal the divorce records"?

Of course, that didn't happen. The decision is based on legal precedent. That's what all those "So-and-so vs. So-and-so citations" in the decision refer to. The relative popularities of the plaintiff and defendant have nothing to do with it.


Sorry, but this really cracked me up lol

Me too! Genesia's posts overall make me laugh out loud before my computer. Great sense of humor much needed especially on rather critical threads! Keep up smile

This is my normal life. These marital standards cannot be recreated with money.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #620 posted 08/17/16 7:38am

LuxLove

Mumio said:

destinyc1 said:

http://pagesix.com/2011/0...xs-fiance/ REMEMBER THIS ARTICLE cool



Just checked that article out. Interesting, does anyone know why it was reported in the article that Prince cold-shouldered Diddy?

P. Diddy is the devil. You didn't know?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #621 posted 08/17/16 7:48am

malbena

wildgoldenhoney said:

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

I want you all to know the ex-wife presented to the Judge copies of message-board posts and comments posted in the immediate aftermath of her divorce.

You know which message board comments she is talking about, eh?

You are now all part of the court record!

falloff U KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? MANIA'S ON THE ORG!! lol Smile everybody! razz

Whether sealed or unsealed, the certain resentment against this individual has, is, and will continue. Thus, I don't find this argument relevant in her defense added to the fact that she chose to share about her private life via social media.

I would encourage her and her lawyers however to stress more on the privacy of Prince and how most people who respected him would rather see his divorce kept private. and focus on his music, his talent, his philantropy, this unique persona and much more he had to offer....

This is my normal life. These marital standards cannot be recreated with money.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #622 posted 08/17/16 7:49am

ISaidLifeIsJus
tAGame

avatar

XxAxX said:

XxAxX said:

oooo. slam.



important distinction between what the judge said and the "It" the judge refers to. "It notes that if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

the Judge did not say: "if Ms. Testolini desired to stay out of the public eye, she should not have provided pictures of her children to US Magazine."

"It" is the The Star Stribune. read the order., p.11 para 3

the Judge only points out that the Star Tribune made this point.

If the Judge didnt think this was an important argument he wouldnt have put it in his Order.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #623 posted 08/17/16 7:52am

zenarose

XxAxX...... I read the Facebook post you are speaking of!! Quote " Thankfully I am passed the days of someone slamming a kitchen cabinet and me instinctively ducking for cover" Also this Quote

"I developed it after some major trauma several years ago" refering to PTSD. I do have a screen shot of it just in case it disappears. It shows that it was posted today 8/17/2016, 3 hours ago. IMO she is referring to PTSD due to domestic violence, whether from her Father, Mother, sibling, spouse, ect. It could also refer to several other violent situtions such as rape or robery.... I had to read what she said a couple of times. Then I got SO DANG MAD!! I paced around making up new cuss words (I added them to my spread sheet for future use) I am going to think on this a bit. I don't know what she is insinuating.... but I don't think I'll take a bite of that pie.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #624 posted 08/17/16 8:01am

LuxLove

zenarose said:

XxAxX...... I read the Facebook post you are speaking of!! Quote " Thankfully I am passed the days of someone slamming a kitchen cabinet and me instinctively ducking for cover" Also this Quote

"I developed it after some major trauma several years ago" refering to PTSD. I do have a screen shot of it just in case it disappears. It shows that it was posted today 8/17/2016, 3 hours ago. IMO she is referring to PTSD due to domestic violence, whether from her Father, Mother, sibling, spouse, ect. It could also refer to several other violent situtions such as rape or robery.... I had to read what she said a couple of times. Then I got SO DANG MAD!! I paced around making up new cuss words (I added them to my spread sheet for future use) I am going to think on this a bit. I don't know what she is insinuating.... but I don't think I'll take a bite of that pie.


Perhaps she is prepping people for something.


I dunno I still hope she wins the appeal.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #625 posted 08/17/16 8:02am

malbena

zenarose said:

XxAxX...... I read the Facebook post you are speaking of!! Quote " Thankfully I am passed the days of someone slamming a kitchen cabinet and me instinctively ducking for cover" Also this Quote

"I developed it after some major trauma several years ago" refering to PTSD. I do have a screen shot of it just in case it disappears. It shows that it was posted today 8/17/2016, 3 hours ago. IMO she is referring to PTSD due to domestic violence, whether from her Father, Mother, sibling, spouse, ect. It could also refer to several other violent situtions such as rape or robery.... I had to read what she said a couple of times. Then I got SO DANG MAD!! I paced around making up new cuss words (I added them to my spread sheet for future use) I am going to think on this a bit. I don't know what she is insinuating.... but I don't think I'll take a bite of that pie.

Do you have a link for that post?

This is my normal life. These marital standards cannot be recreated with money.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #626 posted 08/17/16 8:04am

ISaidLifeIsJus
tAGame

avatar

malbena said:

zenarose said:

XxAxX...... I read the Facebook post you are speaking of!! Quote " Thankfully I am passed the days of someone slamming a kitchen cabinet and me instinctively ducking for cover" Also this Quote

"I developed it after some major trauma several years ago" refering to PTSD. I do have a screen shot of it just in case it disappears. It shows that it was posted today 8/17/2016, 3 hours ago. IMO she is referring to PTSD due to domestic violence, whether from her Father, Mother, sibling, spouse, ect. It could also refer to several other violent situtions such as rape or robery.... I had to read what she said a couple of times. Then I got SO DANG MAD!! I paced around making up new cuss words (I added them to my spread sheet for future use) I am going to think on this a bit. I don't know what she is insinuating.... but I don't think I'll take a bite of that pie.

Do you have a link for that post?

Just go to FB and type her name in under search.

So, now it has gone from the ST is searching for drugs, to it was domestic violence per the insinuations of the ex?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #627 posted 08/17/16 8:06am

rogifan

Genesia said:



rogifan said:


rogifan said:
I'm sorry I still don't see where the Star Tribune made a compelling argument argument that it is in the public interest for this stuff to be unsealed. Outside of people being interested in celebrity gossip what is the public good here?

Oh and I don't care how much people dislike Mani or whatever. Still doesn't make a case for unsealing this being in the public interest. It's just people being vindictive because they don't like someone.


Seriously? Do you think the judge came to prince.org and said, "Man, people really don't like this woman. I better unseal the divorce records"?

Of course, that didn't happen. The decision is based on legal precedent. That's what all those "So-and-so vs. So-and-so citations" in the decision refer to. The relative popularities of the plaintiff and defendant have nothing to do with it.


I'm not talking about the judge, I'm talking about fans. I'm thinking about Prince's privacy. This woman seems whack and Prince isn't here to defend himself. sad
[Edited 8/17/16 8:12am]
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #628 posted 08/17/16 8:10am

LuxLove

LuxLove said:

zenarose said:

XxAxX...... I read the Facebook post you are speaking of!! Quote " Thankfully I am passed the days of someone slamming a kitchen cabinet and me instinctively ducking for cover" Also this Quote

"I developed it after some major trauma several years ago" refering to PTSD. I do have a screen shot of it just in case it disappears. It shows that it was posted today 8/17/2016, 3 hours ago. IMO she is referring to PTSD due to domestic violence, whether from her Father, Mother, sibling, spouse, ect. It could also refer to several other violent situtions such as rape or robery.... I had to read what she said a couple of times. Then I got SO DANG MAD!! I paced around making up new cuss words (I added them to my spread sheet for future use) I am going to think on this a bit. I don't know what she is insinuating.... but I don't think I'll take a bite of that pie.


Perhaps she is prepping people for something.


I dunno I still hope she wins the appeal.

Or maybe she is just saying the stress of the situation is causing a PTSD flair up?


I have contracted speculation-itis from this forum sick

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #629 posted 08/17/16 8:11am

zenarose

ISaidLifeIsJustAGame said:

malbena said:

Do you have a link for that post?

Just go to FB and type her name in under search.

So, now it has gone from the ST is searching for drugs, to it was domestic violence per the insinuations of the ex?

That's the way it appears to me. When you get a chance read her post and see what your thoughts are. I'm really stunned. neutral

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 21 of 40 « First<171819202122232425>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Divorce Records to be Unsealed per Judge