Mel Gibson Spends $7.2 Million Per Ye...

Mel Gibson Spends $7.2 Million Per Year in Living Expenses, Report Says

There are 61 comments on the FOX News story from Aug 20, 2010, titled Mel Gibson Spends $7.2 Million Per Year in Living Expenses, Report Says. In it, FOX News reports that:

Mel Gibson and Oksana Grigorieva have been leading separate lives in Los Angeles since their ugly split.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at FOX News.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Just Sayin

Belconnen, Australia

#1 Aug 20, 2010
For a start, I think the $600K figure includes not just personal expenses but financial obligations to his old family and even some business expenses.

Even if it was all personal expenses, it is and should be IRRELEVANT to the issue of how much OG should get in child support. THEY WERE NOT MARRIED so his obligation only extends to the child, AND NOT to the mother. They weren't even together that long - around 18mths based on reliable third party reports (not the 3 years which she claims).

Judges have latitude in deciding on child support and will take into consideration any sort of support, financial and otherwise MG currently puts towards his child. The judge will also take into account OG's expenses on the child, which would require OG to submit receipts and accountant reports. Only in very unique special circumstances will judges rule that child support must be at a level commensurate with the father's wealth and ability to pay. As they were not married, I don't think OG's case falls into this category. Anything over and above what MG is legally obliged to pay will have to be VOLUNTARY and given OG's behaviour to date, I don't think he will be too quick to give in.
Just Sayin

Belconnen, Australia

#2 Aug 20, 2010
Another thing. For a start, I really don't think illegitimate children are entitled to the same rights as legitimate children. If a man has illegitimate children, his legal obligations to them should be the bare minimum and come secondary to his obligations to his legitimate children.

Anything else and you undermine the basis of marriage. Why get married at all if your rights within a marriage are not any different to your rights outside of it ?

I know people will say that illegitimate children should not have to suffer but then why or why do we then bother with the sham of marriage then ? We should just get rid of it completely, not least of all extending to gay/lesbian people.

Since: Aug 10

Bartlett, IL

#3 Aug 20, 2010
I don't know how things work in Australia, but you're wrong about how they work here.

1) Child support is determined based on the income of the non-custodial parent, in this case, Mel Gibson. The computation starts with income, certain subtractions are allowed, and then support is a % of remaining income. Perhaps what you're referring to is a claim against Mel's assets? If so, you are correct, in some states, but not CA, which recognizes domestic partners. I don't know if Mel and Oksana were in fact domestic partners, but if so, she'd have a claim to it.

2) The rights of children are equal unless a will specifically cuts them out, regardless of whether the parents were married. You're question about "why get married" deals with rights to Oksana. Lucia's rights are the same as all Mel's other children. She has an equal claim, whether Mel was married to her mother or not. Oksana's rights with respect to medical decisions, inheritance rights and like would be limited because they were not married, but as I said, CA is very liberal if you are deemed to be domestic partners.

3) Finally your claim that child support is for the child and not the mother is only slightly correct. If the mother is the custodial parent, child support is used to maintain a home and care for the child. So, it goes for the house Lucia and Oksana live in, the ulitites, the food,(for both), and if Oksana is a full time caretaker for Lucia, the money is used for her as well, for her clothes, medical expenses, etc. I understand many people think Oksana should get a job and support herself, but that's not the way the law works. Many custodial parents have to work as the child support they receive is not enough not to. Presumably Mels income is high enough where 20% is enough for Oksana not to have to work. Assuming she's the custodial parent, she's entitled to child support until Lucia is 18. People get all bent out of shape about this when the non-custodial parent is wealthy, believing their should be a ceiling, but you if you think about it, why should there be? If child support is 20% for one child, then it's 20% of income, whether that income is $50,000 or $500,000. Keep in mind, there is a difference between an asset settlement and child support.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#4 Aug 20, 2010
Wow. Thanks for the great information, LLA.
linda k

AOL

#5 Aug 21, 2010
thanks....from me too....that really explained a lot, as i don't know anything about the law.....seems fair when you put it that way...
Babe

Madison Heights, MI

#6 Aug 21, 2010
Either way you slice it, Oksana is making a good living ripping Mel Gibson off. The baby doesn't need past $2,000 a month in child care, and top it off at 2,500. The baby isn't even going to school yet. Where is her part in supporting her child too? What ever is left over, Oksana spends, and you think this is right? Oksana let's other people watch her child, so what does he do (if anything) to support her child? Too busy trying to be rich the easy way, because she saw (finally after screwing Mel gibson for it) her CD isn't selling, and now that she did this to Mel, he Mel's not going to help her make another lost CD, so a girl has to do what a girl has to do. She knows this too, when ask.. are you going to make another cd, or was it what are you going to do about your new CD, she replied..I don't know.

$#!^!! These type of women are so spoiled. My first huband thought (years back) that $200 a month was too much child support.lol Oksana was giving a good package deal, but being a gold digger that she is, and a good sucker in more ways then one, will try to suck his bank acct clean, if she can do it. Then she can sit back,relax (smile and laugh her azz off), eat her victory cake, and watch Hookers R Us on tv to get more informed for next time.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#7 Aug 21, 2010
she needs to be throw out of sherman oaks asap, to get the car taken form her, to get the health insurance cut off 100%, and all other expenses cut off, and to dont get a penny in child suport.
if she love that child she cant get a job and get a job for her leasy mother as welkl who dont do a sh.it either. and never worked in her life.

nobody ask her for a baby nobody wants it, she wants the baby she is scared for hte life of her kids? then fc leave the country b.itch!

we dont care and wont miss you.

and mel gibson need to take himself together and show the dan test and drop all this sh.it at once, cut himself off form that woman and that kid who is not his anyway, and stop folling around and acting the marthyr when he has nothing ot do with this woman and her baby, in the first place!!

get out of this sh.it now!

why wait? waht for?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#8 Aug 21, 2010
LLA1 you are wrong.

they were not living togehter ever so she is a gf who got herself pregnat wihtout the knowledge of mle gibson.

further more she is NOT entitled to get a house nor car nor food nor ehalthinsurance pay and electricity and everything as mel gibson is paying for.

those part are parts of alimony and not child suport.

infact she is getting 17.000 dollars a month in child support form mel gibson alone add to it 10.000 form dalton she rteceive 27.000 a month in child suport fdorm men she was never married with!!

thats far too much!!

she dont pay for a house nor car nor gas nor shoping nor healthcare nor electiricty water and so on, and she dont pay for the nanby either nor for the lawyers.
she pay for nothing at lal and the 5.000 dolars she get as childsupport goes directly inside her poscket as well as the 10.000 dolars form dalton.
thats 15.000 dollars a month in pocket money.

add to it the fact that mel gibson is not the father, and oyu have a crook and her mother crook under the same roof klivign the sweet life and who never worked a day in their life.

they should both be put on the electric chair to set an exemple and prevent other form trying to do the same ever.

“Snow days!”

Since: Nov 08

A winter wonderland

#9 Aug 21, 2010
It's his money. He can spend it on Hostess cupcakes if he wants. I think the judge may have a little more to say on the matter, tho.

Even if Oksana only gets 1% of what Mel spends every month,$6000 is still pretty good. I wish I had that kind of income.
Babe

Madison Heights, MI

#10 Aug 21, 2010
Andie J wrote:
It's his money. He can spend it on Hostess cupcakes if he wants. I think the judge may have a little more to say on the matter, tho.
Even if Oksana only gets 1% of what Mel spends every month,$6000 is still pretty good. I wish I had that kind of income.
Hostess cupcakes... LOL

Some hard working people out there, that DO WORK FOR THEIR MONEY only get a 1% increase in pay, and has to settle for that, why not Oksana?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#11 Aug 21, 2010
Babe wrote:
<quoted text>
Hostess cupcakes... LOL
Some hard working people out there, that DO WORK FOR THEIR MONEY only get a 1% increase in pay, and has to settle for that, why not Oksana?
whom are you taling about?

and what the f are you doing here??

you want war? i will give you war!

Since: Aug 10

Bartlett, IL

#12 Aug 22, 2010
OLYMPE wrote:
LLA1 you are wrong.
they were not living togehter ever so she is a gf who got herself pregnat wihtout the knowledge of mle gibson.
further more she is NOT entitled to get a house nor car nor food nor ehalthinsurance pay and electricity and everything as mel gibson is paying for.
those part are parts of alimony and not child suportr.
1) I never said they were living together, in fact, I specifically said I didn't know the living arrangements.

2) I never said she was entitled to a house, a car, or food. I said child support is used to maintain a household for the child, meaning Oksana,(or any other custodial parent), uses child support to purchase those things. There is NO mechanism in the law where she needs to prove that all the money received in the form of child support is used exclusively for Lucia, it may be used for herself, and THAT perfectly acceptable under the law. For example, if Mel gives her $1000 and Oksana uses $300 to go grocery shopping, do you really think that Oksana has to prove to the court that the $300 went exclusively for baby food, diapers, etc? No, she can buy whatever she needs from the grocery store to maintain the household the child lives in, and that may include wine for Oksana.

3) Alimony is in addition to child support and is money specifically for the mother.

Since: Aug 10

Bartlett, IL

#13 Aug 22, 2010
Babe wrote:
Either way you slice it, Oksana is making a good living ripping Mel Gibson off. The baby doesn't need past $2,000 a month in child care, and top it off at 2,500. The baby isn't even going to school yet. Where is her part in supporting her child too? What ever is left over, Oksana spends, and you think this is right? Oksana let's other people watch her child, so what does he do (if anything) to support her child? Too busy trying to be rich the easy way, because she saw (finally after screwing Mel gibson for it) her CD isn't selling, and now that she did this to Mel, he Mel's not going to help her make another lost CD, so a girl has to do what a girl has to do. She knows this too, when ask.. are you going to make another cd, or was it what are you going to do about your new CD, she replied..I don't know.
$#!^!! These type of women are so spoiled. My first huband thought (years back) that $200 a month was too much child support.lol Oksana was giving a good package deal, but being a gold digger that she is, and a good sucker in more ways then one, will try to suck his bank acct clean, if she can do it. Then she can sit back,relax (smile and laugh her azz off), eat her victory cake, and watch Hookers R Us on tv to get more informed for next time.
I understand that when the numbers get large, people often think, "it's too much", but Lucia is Mels daughter, and she is entitled to live in the 'lifestyle she was born into. Is there some reason Lucia should not have the same kind of life, house, schooling, clothes, vacations, etc, that Mel's other children have?

Look, Oksana may end up living quite nicely, I don't dispute that, but unless you can prove Oksana somehow stole Mel's sperm, it's his fault she's getting anything. He knows how children are conceived.
Babe

Madison Heights, MI

#14 Aug 23, 2010
LLA1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that when the numbers get large, people often think, "it's too much", but Lucia is Mels daughter, and she is entitled to live in the 'lifestyle she was born into. Is there some reason Lucia should not have the same kind of life, house, schooling, clothes, vacations, etc, that Mel's other children have?
Look, Oksana may end up living quite nicely, I don't dispute that, but unless you can prove Oksana somehow stole Mel's sperm, it's his fault she's getting anything. He knows how children are conceived.
Oh, don't get me wrong, honey. I love babies. I would give mine the moon and stars, if I could, but spoiling them isn't good either. Same as making a nice living for a gold digger, that's not Mel Gibson's wife. The baby should get more as it grows and needs more, but come on, this baby doesn't need this much money and it isn't even in shcool yet, and its too young to even know what a vacation is. Shoot! Right now that baby isn't even worried about if it wearing Pampers are Huggies.
As for sperm, hun, the other person on here talks about the sperm crap, I didn't. I do think (for piece of mind), knowing what type of a person he is dealing with now, and the fact that she will do or say anything and even lie for money. I would get a DNA test, if I were him.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo Grove, IL

#15 Aug 23, 2010
Yes, it's true Lucia, as an infant does not have the same needs as an older child. But courts don't typically set child support based on 'what will be', they try and set it once. Unless there's been a substantial change in the payees income,(20% or more), they don't really want to readdress in the future. Fair? Maybe not, but that is the way it's typically done. I myself get extremely frustrated with the child support laws. The were written to protect uneducated, low income woman, but they affect everyone. For years I tried to find ways so my ex would NOT have to pay child support. It's not easy to do.

Given that Mel and Oksana are not married, all Mel has to do is ask for a DNA test and it will be granted. It should be noted though, this is probably the only time he can do that. There have been numeorus court cases where the father paid child support for years for a child conceived during a marriage only to find out he's not the father. When the dads tried to stop paying for those kids, the courts said no. They basically ruled that the dads were legal fathers if not biological fathers, and it's bad public policy to allow a dad to stop paying if he finds out he's not really the dad. The rulings may seem controversial initially, but I can see the public policy angle.

I know you're not the one making claims about Mel not being the dad, but I just wanted to address that as well. If Mel has ANY doubts about paternity, it really is speak now or forever hold your peace. Proving in 5 years he's not the father will not alleviate him of paternal responsibility. I'm sure his attorneys have told him this, so either Mel knows he's the father through DNA already, Mel has 'decided' he is the father and doesn't need DNA, Mel knows he may not be the father, but has chosen to be the legal father.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#16 Aug 23, 2010
yeah babe get that DNA test done, what are oyu tlaking about?? has mel not done so?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#17 Aug 23, 2010
oh btw fro those not aware of it, last wendensady the DNA test wehre discussed in court already by the judge.

the case was divided in 2 parts with the DNA test fatherhood and motherhood being discussed.

as well as custody and money and passport.

but the central issue on both parts was the paternity issue.

everybody could see that thanks to online filming of the court hall and the offficial document on the door of the courtroom, stating what was on order that day..

it celarly stated that the paternity was an issue on both part and the name of the real father stood as "omitted".. wow!!!

iot means that Mel gibson is not the father and that they have already engaged in paternity test tlak anbd that the judge know that Mel Gibson is not the father.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#18 Aug 23, 2010
Babe

Madison Heights, MI

#19 Aug 23, 2010
Wow ! I saw the board. GO GET'EM..TEAM MEL!!

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#20 Aug 23, 2010
hii sweetie!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lethal Weapon Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Jewish Cop Busted Mel Gibson (Aug '06) Mar '17 Bob Masters 392
News Mel Gibson apologizes for drunk driving (Jul '06) Mar '17 Hillary Vomit 35
News Hotel demolition: Colony Plaza Hotel meets its ... (May '09) Oct '14 PPP 24
News Danny Glover supports Unifor (Sep '14) Sep '14 screwed again by ... 1
News Horror fans can get their scream on this weekend (Mar '13) Mar '13 abc321 3
News Mel Gibson: Love him or hate him, but you cana ... (Jan '10) Feb '13 Fan of Mel 60
News Exclusive Mel Gibson Interview: A Candid and Ra... (Aug '12) Aug '12 Ely 5
More from around the web