Stay in Touch

Check out CL's Book

Woman Gets $7 Million in Infidelity Post-Nup Clause

unicornYou know how I say around here, “Sorry is as sorry does”? And encourage any potential unicorns to get that sorry in the form of a post-nup?

Well, one lady in Maryland, Anna Cristina Niceta, got the I-won’t-fuck-around-again promise in writing, and — are we surprised? — her FW cheated again. Then he tried to argue that the post-nup he signed was invalid. Because… dunno… consequences.

The American Bar Association Journal reports:

The Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled Oct. 26 against Thomas L. Lloyd, who claimed that the pricey penalty in a postnuptial agreement was void because it lacked consideration, was unconscionable and was the result of undue influence.

The appeals court ruled against Lloyd on all three arguments.

LOL. What undue influence was that, Thomas? The never-thought-I’d-get-caught vapors?

Nice to see these things are binding.

More from the ABA:

Niceta discovered Lloyd’s first affair in June 2014. As they began working on a reconciliation, Niceta asked Lloyd to retitle his existing financial accounts in both their names and to enter into a postnuptial agreement for her to feel secure in their future together, the opinion said.

Niceta’s lawyers presented Lloyd with a “lump sum” clause in a draft prenup that said Lloyd would pay $5 million if he engaged in “inappropriate and/or immoral conduct” with his former paramour or any party outside the marriage.

Lloyd suggested increasing the penalty to $7 million as a showing of his good faith, his lawyer testified.

Lloyd and Niceta signed the agreement in 2015—against the advice of his lawyers.

The 2015 prenuptial agreement stated that Niceta was “working on forgiving” Lloyd for his prior adultery. Lloyd promised to pay the penalty if he engaged in “adultery, buggery or sodomy” or other inappropriate conduct. That conduct triggering the penalty also included sexting and “romantically kissing, hugging, fondling or embracing another person.”

Hope the $7 million fondle was worth it, bro.

The appeals court did not buy his sad sausage, I know not what I sign, bullshit:

 “Lloyd alone was the trigger of the penalty, and the circuit court found that he had acted with free will in the negotiation of the agreement and thereafter.”

Lloyd wasn’t under the undue influence of his wife. “To the contrary,” the appeals court said, “the court’s factual findings were that Mr. Lloyd did exercise free will in the negotiation of the agreement, and Ms. Niceta’s coercive behaviors were insufficient to show undue influence/duress.”

Whomp, whomp… But can you put a price on exuberant aliveness?

Ask Chump Lady

Got a question for the Chump Lady? Or a submission for the Universal Bullshit Translator? Write to me at [email protected]. Read more about submission guidelines.
    • Spotter: “REAPER1…Target accepted. Send 5!”

      Reaper 1 Artillery Commander: “Status!?”

      Spotter: “Adjust 2 positive!! SEND +2”

      REAPER 1: “Status!


      I left out the call signs but you get the idea. Artillery crews would make great attorneys, or vice versa.

      I see the problem as a drift from pioneer family morals-which necessitated strong men of character, loss of heritage/family accountability and access to the Great Spirit or Higher Power that guides and directs those who choose to receive and accept that small still voice monstrously get trampled in todays matrix of digital white noise.

      I appreciate all spirituality. Religion not so much. IMHO…MAN,… Always finds a way to fuck that up with his “human “ condition. OMG! Van Halen’s 🎶 HUMANS BEING just triggered in my brain. 😀 Queing that up now.

      I wish that in 1975 my High School would have included a “NO BULLSHIT ACCESSMENT chapter of ❤️ Sex & marriage” in our Home Economics class ( YES! We, me-a man TOOK HOME ECONOMICS!!!!!)

      But Damn! My girl put the hurt on dat boi! Hoosahh!,✌️

      • I agree that there’s a lot of media noise supporting sex-pozzy non-monogamy and defending cheating but I think the only people really being swayed by it are cheaters themselves. Maybe careers in media attract a ton of cheaters. Maybe the young and dumb who haven’t yet experienced marriage and children and all the complexities that brings might be temporarily caught up in the nonsense but I expect that demographic will change its mind as reality sets in. In any case, according to a 2013 Gallup poll, public prohibitions against adultery have only gotten stronger over the last thirty years. Adultery came at the bottom of the list for public acceptance of a series of 19 major controversies, getting far lower support than abortion rights and human cloning. Some of the media responses to the poll results were hilarious with op-ed authors tearing their hair out in print over American “puritanical mores.” But what was funny about it was that the same public being polled had only become more accepting of things like gay marriage and single parenting over the same time period so media’s tendency to write off the public’s growing distaste for adultery as merely fundy bias was exposed as spin and bs. Views on adultery appear to be resistant to shifts in religiosity and seem to be growing along with public understanding of the dynamics of emotional abuse and impact on families.

        So why is the media trying to fight this organic trend so hard? Personally I tend to follow the money and suspect it has something to do with the fact that streaming porn is now a bigger media enterprise than all other media combined and is furthermore a cross-investment of other media (Google alone invested $34 *billion*: I think sawing away at prohibitions against things like adultery might be sort of an oblique way of softening the public up to eventually accept even uglier things that the entire porn industry depends on like lax laws against sex trafficking of minors and fuzzy concepts of consent. There might be a better explanation for it but there’s no denying the media is heavily trying to wag the dog regarding stubborn public views on cheating.

        • “Sex work is work.” The argumentation is that you ‘sell your body’ for all labor so prostitution is the same as flipping burgers. Ipso facto the future of at-will employment is that if you are taking pay from an employer they can tell you where to be, and what to do including access to your body sexually. Work is work. This is rich guys trying to bring about Prima Nocta.

      • The good old days when boys AND girls had to take home economics, wood shop and metal shop. Drafting too, if memory serves me correctly. 🤣🤣👏🏻👏🏻

    • My ex refused to sign the post-nup because
      “ the marriage shouldn’t be about money and making it about money feels wrong”
      – oh yeah? What is it about ?
      – love care respect

      Mhm… I just looked at him without saying a word.

      He started cheating with any willing participant when we got engaged and continued throughout the whole marriage.
      Love respect and care 😂😂😂not money.

      We divorced, I got 80% of everything, plus kids.

      The funny part? I asked for 60k in post nup ( to pay for my MS) instead got 10 times more $ , got my MS, found a nice loyal loving partner.

  • “Lloyd suggested increasing the penalty to $7 million as a showing of his good faith, his lawyer testified.”

    This likely gave him extra thrills and he imagined how he was going to dupe her again.

    So glad this happened. May she live a wonderful life, and secure her money from any possible fw taking it.

    • This also probably put the nail in the coffin on the appeals court decision that he was not acting under duress.

    • “Lloyd had also argued that the $7 million lump-sum payment was against public policy for being excessive. “The simple answer to this argument,” the appeals court said, “is that the agreement in no way required Mr. Lloyd to stay married to Ms. Niceta. He could have ended the marriage at any time he chose by remaining separated for 12 months and filing for divorce.”

      And here’s proof that affairs are proof of stupid.

      • Hey VH!

        You just beat me up to it. I may not be a female (I don’t know if I’m a real human being), but some people have to be called by their names. Stupid is stupid. IMHO that’s lowering the bar (no pun intended), I mean, there are worse, but this one’s pretty bad. Overcompensating on the name of “good faith” as a way to reinforce some egocentric behavior, is common among stupid people.

        Superficial ego just around the corner, watch out!

  • Woo hoo, set that precedent, yeah!

    May this chump become individually solvent to a degree that they never feel compelled to marry again. (Not that they never marry again, but that they never feel compelled to it.)

    I think so many of us marry more because we think it’s what’s naturally next, or we should, or the other person asks, etc. We marry some love bomber far too soon, and end up tied to a fuckwit anchor, knowing we need to end it, but intimidated by how horrendous the divorce process is.

    Marrying only after long consideration and a strong feeling it’s the right choice for BOTH parties, and not any sooner, would save the world many expensive and destructive divorces.

    • I was impressed with your comments. I ask myself a lot “why?” “Why did I marry when my own common sense told me it was financially risky?” I liked your comments: “we think it’s what’s naturally next … the other person asks, etc. We marry some love bomber far too soon, and end up tied to a fuckwit anchor, knowing we need to end it, but intimidated by how horrendous the divorce process is. “

    • I see marriage as a construct of patriarchy, and believe women are sold a bill of goods from the time they are little girls that their worth is contingent upon being a wife. Weddings are insanely hyped up, and the hoopla just seems to get worse and worse.
      I keep hoping that as gender equality progresses, girls and women will be equally celebrated for other life milestones than marriage and motherhood.
      I hope this postnup is upheld. Cheaters who ask their chumps for reconciliation need to be legally compelled to put some skin in the game.

      • ” … as gender equality progresses … ”

        Assumes facts not in evidence. Alas.

      • I wanted a family, and I wanted to have children within the structure of a marriage. It was an important life dream of mine. I wanted that because I mostly grew up across the country from all my relatives. I was never close to them because of distance and the untreated alcoholism among most all of the family members. As a result I have some relatives technically but no relationships with them. My own family of origin was devoid of love. As a little kid, I didn’t know about having a circle of friends as a substitute for a healthy secure loving family. Even now it doesn’t have the same appeal.

        I know that a wedding, a family, and a lot of relatives are not a guarantee of love and security, but I am still a little kid with my nose pressed against the window of the Big Kind and Loving Family store wishing I could have what was inside.

        In my case, I’m sure wanting to be
        married and have a family came from being a child and feeling alone in the world.

    • I am 60 (married when I was 30 which was a touch on the late side at that time). Currently I work with a few dozen women in their mid-30s. ALL of them are desperate to marry before 40 because biological clock. TWO married someone they knew to be (verbally) abusive because “I just don’t have time to start over and find someone and get married and get pregnant before I’m 30”.
      It makes me SO SAD that women have to worry about this.

      • If the maternal urge is that strong, and I know it is for some women, I would suggest that they look into invitro (?) fertilization. Marrying because you want to have a baby and oh-here’s-a-guy-who-will-marry-me might be setting oneself up for years of unhappiness with a FW, not to mention divorce and the ugly co-parenting with a FW scenario.
        How many of us chumps were, essentially, single parents even before we found out we were chumps?
        Yes, it is hard. But it is even harder when you have a real baby/child AND an adult baby/child.

        • “If the maternal urge is that strong, and I know it is for some women, I would suggest that they look into invitro (?) fertilization ”

          Yes. There’s also adoption. It makes me wonder if for some women it’s the experience of being pregnant they crave, rather than the end product, the child.

          • Some certainly crave the attention that comes with pregnancy. All too many dump their children on extended family and go off to have more.

            • Yup. Narcissistic mothers love creating a little fan club they can manipulate and have as extensions of themselves.

          • Better be prepared to pay a lot of money to adopt a newborn or infant – up front. The costs are lower if a child is adopted through the foster care system after parents have lost or relinquished their legal rights. If you can’t afford IVF it’s less likely you can afford adoption.

            • My EX and I adopted our son 16 years ago in NY State. Cost us nothing – we adopted through the foster care system. I don’t know if all the states are the same – call your local social services.

        • Agree that there is IVF and also adoption. And WE know that FWs are worse than singleness. But when you’re young I think that having a baby alone seems pretty scary… so they smoke the hopium.

          And for me anyway, while staying with my FW for 20+ years was stupid AF, I guess I’m glad that I was married when I had babies. At least there’s another person in the house to help, and at least we had double income. So I understand the desire to be married or coupled up before you have a baby. But it makes me sad for them.

          Good Friend: I personally don’t know anyone who wants to get pregnant “for the attention”. I think usually it’s a maternal urge.

      • I was knocking on that biological clock door and it did influence my decision. I really wanted children and my sons are the greatest joy of my life. I wouldn’t second guess that decision. Staying with FW out of obligation was a poor decision. That’s all me!

      • Desperation to marry seems to wax and wane with economic conditions to some extent. The student loan debt crisis coupled with the pay gap aren’t helping. And the media hasn’t come a long way regarding the objectification of women. If anything, it’s gotten worse in the web age since the spin is so accessible. I feel like younger generations are sinking back to Victorian-era views that women have a “sell-by” date and will cease to have any intrinsic value when crows feet appear. I’m noticing they’re not just desperate to wed before 40 now but many are starting to look haunted by 25.

        I don’t think there’s any mystery why. I’m reading up on the so-called generational war between Gen X and Millennials and realized that the whole thing was a wag-the-dog operation by media to give a pulpit to a bunch of teenagers to whip up even more terror among the earlier generation that they’re getting “old” and irrelevant. It was so obvious that the main targets of the attacks were Millennial women since most of the guff was about Millennials “cheugy” taste for skinny jeans, side parts and wearing miniskirts over leggings (which men don’t wear). I don’t think most of those kids would even be voicing those views if they weren’t gaining so much attention by doing so. I don’t remember when kiddies were ever given so much power in the media. The power itself is corrupting and it reminds me of Lord of the Flies. But it’s also expedient because terrorizing a group of consumers– particularly women– into ageistic desperation is great for the bottom line for multiple industries.

        Susan Faludi’s Backlash is more relevant now than when she wrote the book in the 90s except in one sense: In 1993, the “fertility crisis” was just a media invention sponsored by baby-wares and housewares producers who were furious that women were deferring marriage and family in favor of getting advanced degrees and establishing careers first. But now there may actually be a looming fertility crisis related to pollution and environmental hormone disruptors. Studies have shown that individuals and societies tend to respond to underlying threats to health and fertility by shifting into what’s called a “fast life strategy” that involves aggressive mating to adapt to what might be a shortened window of fertility and life expectancy.

        Corporate media sponsors tend to be toxic industries that don’t welcome radicalism so it’s not like sponsored media are going to encourage (beyond a bit of lip service) women to lobby to close the pay gap, make college education free or clean up diet and the environment. Instead the media and advertisers are going to take advantage of young people’s growing sense of fear by hard-selling wedding mythology and family bliss and related consumerism as the answer.

        • I think society has a lot to do with the pressure of marrying. Fairy tales usually are about finding someone, and end up with “they married and lived happily ever after.” Both in books and in media, it’s thrust upon us from an extremely young age that marriage is the goal. No talk about what happens after or how to find a worthy partner. Due to the inherent constraints of books in movies, “relationships” are shortened to fit and it usually is “lust” of looks, nothing substantial to make a foundation of.
          A large majority of Disney movies is guilty of this.
          I never dreamed of my wedding or dressed up anyone in a pretend wedding, so when the time came I was pretty meh. Same with kids- never pretended to have a baby so i’m meh. And I grew up differently than the norm.

          Perhaps it’s time we take a look at ourselves as a society and see if what we’re teaching the next generation is what we want them to learn.

        • Hey Hell of a Chump.

          “Corporate media sponsors tend to be toxic industries that don’t welcome radicalism”

          Somehow, I humbly think it’s the opposite (that is, if I’ve contextually understood what you’re expressing). MM is more about L O V I N G radicalism, but the message has to be contextually dissonant and altered to a point, that what is shown in the screen could even be diametrically opposite of the narrative, or the nature of the report itself.

          You just have to recreate the narrative of who are “the good, forward-thinking people” vs the “bad, archaic people”, and you’re all set. I’m not talking about political orientation or anything like that. Many times, such politically minded controversies tend to be rather stale, reductionist and obeying to very selective views which are deliberately incompatible with one another just for the sake of creating more divisive social dynamics.

          There’s never gonna be equality without sacrificing the good people who just appear to be “on the wrong team”, and such a dialectic makes a society decadent rather than being fair.

          Dictatorships have happened no matter if those were leaning to the left, right of even center, or anarchism, or whatever comes next. It doesn’t matter. None of them cut it. The abuse of applied dialectics is what’s happening whenever there’s a generational shift.

          Ideas are not the problem, but people are. People are the problem, and the solution.

          • Trying to go point by point in case anything addresses what you meant–

            Radicalism is one of those funny words that can mean all sorts of things. People will say that they have been “radicalized” (in a good sense) simply because their views have expanded beyond mainstream acceptability and then will identify the mainstream views they oppose as “radical” (in a bad sense). I meant “radicalism” a little ironically because I don’t actually believe that agitating for things like environmental protection, protection of human health and equality are radical but certain corporations dub it that because it hurts profits.

            I think ideas can be a problem but to quote Margaret Atwood, “Ideas aren’t responsible for the people who believe in them.”

            As far as right or left not being the problem– totalitarianism dresses itself up as right (fascism) or left (Bolshevism) and is certainly radical in the radical evil sense. Neither bear any resemblance to traditional conservatism or liberalism and right and left totalitarianism are so similar that it becomes its own animal. The defining common ground between right and left forms (including anyone presenting themselves as “anarchic”) is the cult of “scientism”– goofy, sciency-sounding, existential versions of the divine right of kings which divide humanity into “good and bad” castes and prop up supposedly “born” leaders who will guide the world to a paradise on earth free of disease, suffering and ugliness. That’s a problematic idea since it always seems to require mass annihilation of anyone deemed “bad” or “defective” or to have the “wrong” ideas on the road to “paradise.”

            If this illustrates another of your points, seeing ideas as the problem can also be a problem. Stalin, Franco and leaders of various South American juntas even decided that ideas were heritable (“red gene” theory) as a justification for killing or displacing the children of opponents, something that so-called rationalists like Richard Dawson and Sam Harris started re-invoking with their “memetic evolution” concept. Harris even infamously called for killing people for having the “wrong” ideas. Hannah Arendt identified the latter as the linchpin of right or left totalitarianism– the designation of an “objective enemy” who can be punished or killed without having committed any discernible crime and merely for what they think or represent.

            As far as the corporate media selling us radicalism (in the bad sense), I think Sheldon Wolin was right that the US is entering an age of inverted totalitarianism and it’s being peddled as “democracy” and apple pie. But neoliberalism is radicalism in conservative clothing. Not that Dems in the US and social democrats in Sweden aren’t just as busy privatizing everything– selling off public resources and regulatory bodies to corporate control and dressing this up as “public-private” contracts. How going halvsies on privatization can be rationalized as “liberal” is beyond me since Mussolini described fascism as “when you can’t slip a cigarette paper between corporations and government.” Bolsheviks did exactly the same thing under a different banner in creating Soviet state capitalism which, like the fascists, required wiping out unions.

        • Was this Gen X or Gen Z you were referring to? As a Gen X, I’m too busy being part of the ‘sandwich generation’, raising my minor children while caring for aging parents, to care what the millenials are wearing. The Gen Zs seem to be the ones that are wagging the judgey finger of the internet at everyone else, rather than look at themselves or the inherent ills of society caused by its historically patriarchial structure to get a grasp on the problem and start implementing changes. They are acting like this is all their parents’ fault, and railing with childish rebellion against what they see as fusty attitudes that don’t understand their need to be young and free, rather than looking further up the chain at the way society’s embedded attitudes do us all a disservice and realising that every upcoming generation goes through this and that they will be passed the mantle of oppressive responsibility sooner than they think.

    • I don’t think people should marry in haste, but I was engaged for 18 mos and met FW’s family and he was able to conceal his FW nature for the entirety. I think that a year or so is fine, but past that you are wasting your time on someone who doesn’t want a commitment IF *you* do. I am one of those people who believe generally that a contract of marriage protects women’s interests and assets (being traditionally the lesser earners) and children. I have seen people get royally screwed financially without the right to joint assets and in end of life scenarios. I am aware there are many exceptions to this as well.

      • I also think, and the courts agree, that in general children benefit from having two parents and a dual income household. Women and children on average suffer severe downgrade in quality of living when the men walk away. The men generally do not. They often do not take lesser careers in order to be available for the children’s needs and have greater earning potential over time so recover more quickly.

        The courts however do not award enough maintenance for children and spouses. A case, I think of old white men governing men. Maybe they worry if they made the penalties too severe the men would just skip out? Oh yeah, they already do that. I cannot understand how I ended up with four people (three minor kids) as entirely my responsibility and only half our joint income. It is unconscionable. However, when considering only half of child support actually gets paid in the US, it is a scary thought!

        I would never have wanted to raise kids on my own from a financial safety and security perspective which would override all else; if I couldn’t take care of them well I wouldn’t have had them. But once they are born you are out of luck. I got left holding the bag anyway. Joke’s on me, price of procreating with a fake, fraud and phony FW.

    • Abuse is such a protection racket. Because social and clinical reactions to emotional abuse victims are arguably colored by existing biases towards DV survivors, it’s probably relevant that about 50% of domestic violence victims will reportedly be abused in a subsequent relationship. It’s not really surprising because abusers of all stripes tend to specialize in playing “rescuer.” Because of certain peculiarities of abuser psychology, abusers tend to be far better than average at hoodwinking and concealing their agendas. And considering the typical blaming, shaming and alienating social and therapeutic responses to survivors emerging from abuse, abusers’ skillful “rescuer pose” would give them an edge in gaining trust from a recently traumatized individual. Many survivors find themselves socially isolated and that even friends and family will distance themselves following abuse. Lack of social support has been identified as the key factor in worsening PTSD and the key obstacle to recovery. When regular “nice” people aren’t nice enough, frauds more easily stand out as heroes in contrast.

      To repeat my usual spiel, a big part of the reason abuse survivors are treated marginally by social context and therapists boils down to bad theories in victimology that sustain primitive biases towards abuse survivors. Humans are basically apes with smart phones and the typical, primitive, knee-jerk response to someone who’s experiencing misfortune is to step away to avoid “catching” the bad luck. There’s also an added fear factor in abuse since it’s safer to take sides with a dangerous perpetrator who’s unlikely to face legal restraint or consequences than a limping victim. Onlookers might be prone to arbitrarily find fault with victims to justify cuddling up to the perpetrator for safety.

      The old, moldy, blaming theories of why victims become victims– that there must have been something psychologically “wrong” with the victim prior to abuse that led them to be abused (statistically untrue– victims are no more likely than the general public to come from dysfunctional backgrounds or to have had low pre-abuse self esteem)– only fuel the primitive bystander response. And since these bias-intensifying theories affect legal response to abuse and too few perpetrators are legally restrained or discouraged, this increases the bystander tendency to distance themselves from victims and at least avoid angering perpetrators. It also increases the rate of abuse. DV rates are vastly lower in countries that strictly enforce stiff legal consequences than in countries with few protections and lax enforcement.

      I get so sick of codependency tripe associated with partner abuse. I feel like it’s almost more damaging when the victim-blaming comes in patronizing “we’re just here to help you face your part in this and why you feel you deserve to be abused” form. And the view is just incorrect. That’s not to say that some survivors couldn’t have had harsh backgrounds or that this can’t complicate getting out of abusive relationships. But if something isn’t statistically true of the whole or even the majority of individuals who experience certain events, it can’t be automatically assumed to be a main driving factor for the phenomenon. Whether someone came from a Hallmark family or a dysfunctional childhood, it can still happen to them. It’s still going to be hard to get out and they’re still going to face a blast of discouraging bias and alienation when they emerge. They might still be sucked into the protection racket of a subsequent abuser whose “understanding” rescue pose seems like a relief in contrast to the typical hinky bystander and clinical reactions.

      Regardless of advances in victimology and cutting edge research that concludes the entire explanation for why victims become entrapped in abuse can be found in abusers’ tactics and MOs and societal response, the blamey view still endures. Sort of like how you’ll find a particular spin-off style of clothing in a bargain bin 15 years after some big design house showed it on the Paris runway, too many run of the mill helping professionals ignore new developments in their own fields and keep repackaging and peddling the same outdated and harmful approaches. Instead of looking at themselves and looking to the flaws in their own approaches as part of the trap, clinicians who peddle these views will take survivors’ statistical risk of landing in subsequent abusive relationships as yet more “proof” that victims are somehow perpetuating it.

      Imagine if victim-blaming theories and dynamics like these surrounded the issue of bank robbery. Bankers would find themselves with very few friends, losing a lot of money in heists and probably more vulnerable to hiring scam artists posing as financial experts.

      Ahem, end of rant.

    • Amiisfree I like your comments. I married my love bomber, a year after I met him. Why? Because he was love bombing me so hard that he convinced me I was special- that WE were unique and amazing. I honestly thought he was a bit weird, sex was weird, but we had a special kind of love, an amazing bond, blah blah. I stayed married for 25 years until an horrific DDay. Somewhere along the line I bought into the specialness story and began embracing my marriage with a religious like fervor. It became my central focus and I worked really hard at it. It was my life, he was my life. And we all know how it goes- I was just the respectable appliance wife looking after the adulting and being a mother while he was out fucking randos to get his “needs” met. It’s flipped the idea of marriage right on its head for me. I’m the end, I didn’t even get a good financial settlement because of my no-fault country and because he was such a cunning narcissist I just needed to get rid of him in the end.

      • FKA same here more or less. He love bombed HARD – nothing bothered him, super ultra sweet, patience to spare, I remember telling my mom there wasn’t a mean bone in his body….. Moved in together after about 4 months and got married a year later. The red flags were there but subtle – he said “I love you” first and I remember thinking that was kinda weird honestly, he’d get hot under the collar a little quick at random stuff ( incompetent store help, traffic, misplacing his wallet etc ) but it was never at me… yet. I put them all down to “you do you”.

        Fast forward a year and change later and he tells me he ” needs space” in the parking lot of our golf course. I drove in to the parking lot with a loving husband, out with a mean narcissist two hours later. Literally… Dream just went dark. Why I didn’t just leave then I don’t know. The sweetness was replaced by contempt, the patience with split second rage and divorce threats if I made him wait even an extra 30 seconds to put on earrings – l I just swallowed it all. Discoveries of naked pics of “ex” gf followed, all hours facebook sesh’s etc, tons of gasligthing, anger to distract from the issue at hand, and then as quick as she came (excuse the pun) she was gone.

        I warily stayed on (coulda woulda shoulda run fast and far…) and now we are here. I have a narcissist service checklist that is long and tough but I am smart and resilient and working for the greater good of all so I got it to work and managed “not to get fired”. How stupid was I to keep putting his needs first. … Expensive new home (yep I paid for my half in cash…) perfect place etc etc. You can guess what happened 4 months later – another woman from his past emerges with a tangled tale of entitlement left over from her “help” ending STBX’s first marriage back in 2009. What the hell?? I have been the wife for the past 8 years!!! His ex wife is a few states away and we aren’t even friends (don’t have each others numbers, no social media just a wave and smile during family weddings ) but evidently I have it coming because of some made up AP ” wives suck theory of relativity”.. This bitch makes the vagina selfie girl seem like Tinkerbell. She is mean and persistent, slags me multiple times a day on a phone I still pay for. I’m not pick me dancing, not engaging with her at all, and I’m leaving as fast as I can – he’s the onestalling… She seems intent on – I don’t know – making me feel so badI just abandon my share of the house and escape with only my sanity? I’,m sane thanks to LACGAL and the community, and I am not going to pay the hornier than thou tax, but damn its awful. My lawyer gave me the steps I need in order to get an order of protection from both her and him if I need it. Upshot is they have to trespass or threaten or do harm first. I do get a little break because a town cop lives 2 doors down…. This can’t be my life….

        She has problems ( I read somewhere that this type of poaching stuff is actually in the DSM 5 as a form of psychopathic behavior. ) I get that part but I still just believe my stbx is into this shit, especially after she wrecked his first marriage and nags him constantly about our marriage – I don’t see how he values this person, even a hair. All while not quite valuing me enough to be willing to work on ending our commitment to each other quickly like adults would. Model of marriage – blown into microscopic shards that cut deep. Definitely wary of love bombing now…. Once I am out I just want to be alone for a while….

  • He restarted cheating 3 years after signing… these people are so deluded and wreckless

    • I have a suspicion that he never stopped and it took her three years to CATCH him again.

      • Yes. He carried on with the cheating, got sloppy because he hadn’t gotten caught…and got caught.

  • This just prove that cheaters will cheat. Guess he thought he would be better at hiding it but he wasn’t. Glad for her!

  • $7 million dollars worth of proof that he sucks. Yep, in 7 million ways.
    The only real shock of any of this is that he signed the clause.
    The going back to cheating part was a given from the start.

    • Signing the clause goes to the indelible hubris of cheaters/liars. They’re so clever, they’ll never get caught.🙄😂

      I’m thrilled your Courts decided in this Chump’s favour, yay !😂🤣👏👏

      • You know me, always applying DV stuff to cheating. Another explanation for why he signed the clause might relate to batterers’ (and serial killers’) tendency to compartmentalize into a sort of Smeagol/Golum division. There’s an enduring theory that batterers are quasi-split personalities who shift in and out of separate “personae.” Unlike someone with actual dissociative personality, abusers have some awareness that they’re doing this and can shift between personalities according to whatever will get them what they want in the moment. In other words, on a certain level, they know they’re doing it which is why the behavior is defined as a criminal disorder, not mental illness. But it’s the investment in each “role” that makes abusers so diabolically convincing to onlookers and victims. For instance, when a batterer is in “remorse” mode, they might invest in that image of themselves more deeply than a method actor. They believe it with 92.36% of their heart and soul. Each persona might even have different views and memories which is very helpful for when perpetrators shift back into “abuser mode” and want to rewrite past events as the victims’ fault.

        So– alternative view– the defendant in this case, when he shifted back into his “Tom the Cheater” persona, probably had difficulty remembering what “Tom the Groveling Penitent” was thinking back when he offered $7m. Tom the Cheater– who remembers the entire marriage in a different way than Groveling Penitent Tom and feels mostly resentment for the victim– rewrote the past and decided that the only thing that could drive him to make such a foolhardy offer was coercion and witchcraft. Even if Tom the Groveling Penitent felt he couldn’t live without the victim and was desperate to stop her from leaving, Tom the Cheater doesn’t remember that feeling and doesn’t relate. Fortunately the court didn’t go along with Tom the Cheater’s revisionism and accepted Tom the Penitent’s decision.

        • Again, HOAC, I’m so glad you wrote this. It’s the best explanation I’ve heard for how my ex-FW acted. On some level, I think he really was switching back and forth between selves, but he wasn’t mentally ill or truly dissociative.

          • Thanks back. Mentally ill people don’t have the wherewithal to shift in and of states at will. But criminals know to exercise and “unleash” their criminal selves only when there are no witnesses or cameras pointed at them. Abusers know to keep their abuse concealed behind closed doors and know better than to punch armed court marshals or their bosses. Maybe there’s compulsion involved in criminality but still enough self control to be expedient and that’s what defines it as far as the courts are concerned.

  • Yet another cheater who’s convinced it’s not a “him” problem, but just some conspiracy of unlucky circumstances that forced him to cheat, but that will surely never happen again. Because just because he did a bad thing doesn’t mean he’s a bad person. $7 mil strikes me as a lot to put on the table just to be able to argue that it was bad luck, not bad character, but I guess it depends on how much money you’re working with.

  • If I was to marry again (to anyone) I would want clauses & protections. None of this “romantic” love-bombing bullshit that doesn’t seem to be worth the paper it’s printed on. Of course, I would like to see how many people would actually marry then if this became the norm? Congratulations & Have a Great Life to Ms. Niceta!

    • I agree. Marriage is, among other things, and perhaps first and foremost, a financial undertaking (I’m not discounting the other rights marriage confers, from making health decisions to being excluded from funeral and burial arrangements, which same-sex couples were long denied).

      I don’t think I ever want to marry again, or that I will have the chance or opportunity, but if it were in the cards, a visit to the lawyer and a contract about finances and inheritance would precede the nuptials.

      As someone who divorced in her mid-60s, and whose future financial security took a big hit when my ex’s secret life made it impossible to stay married to him, at a time in life when recouping the loss is not possible, I would not make myself financially vulnerable again. And if the person I planned to marry was offended by that stance, that would be proof positive I shouldn’t marry him.

  • Post-nups don’t exist where I live, but even if they did, I wouldn’t encourage them because even if the cheater goes for it, you now have a price over your head. All more motive for them to kill you and while not everyone who cheats, kills, almost everyone who kills will have lied, cheated, scammed in their life before.

    • Spouse killers typically don’t need monetary motives to kill. Statistically, merely trying to leave an abuser carries the highest risk. Money might add an incentive to kill but a postnup can also be a disincentive since it’s a legal document that provides investigators and prosecutors with a ready-made motive for murder making it harder for any killer to evade investigation and beat the rap. The kind of scheming personality who would plan a murder and plan to cover it up might also factor that risk.

      If you think about it, anything victims do to defend themselves can be taken as provocation by an abuser. Holding up an arm to ward off blows, escaping, getting an order of protection, divorce, prosecuting the abuser, etc., can all arguably enrage abusers more. So can trying to get monetary compensation for abuse. But I don’t think the answer is that victims shouldn’t be compensated or protected.

      • This is why I gave my lawyer info I had on FW that he would not want made public. If anything suspicious ever happens to me, my lawyer will take it to the police to show FW has a motive.
        I doubt FW would do anything, but then again, I didn’t think he would cheat, so I assume nothing.

        • See my “quasi-split personality” rant. Maybe you never saw the side of him that would cheat before the fact. Maybe he’d flip into that personality while packing up after work and planning the evening’s adventures, then would switch back to “Honorable Senor Buttercup” on his way home. Once someone’s shown they can compartmentalize different “personae” to that extent– enough to deceive a rational person for years– it’s risky to bet on what other interesting facets they might have hidden inside them and what they’re capable of. Might as well err on the side of safety.

  • Oh, man. This is fantastic precedent. I started to do something similar with DD1-not to the tune of $7 mil, but wanted everything in my name, post nup, total control in exchange for promises of a “mistake.” The mirage counselor at the time thought that was too extreme and manipulative! That I was the problem, not the FW wanker with the wandering dick and propensity to gaslight and deceive. Oh, if only I had a little inkling of what I know now. Damn.

  • There is no pussy worth $7 million! Glad he paid that penalty! Wish I had that clause to get back all the money my XW spent on her affairs.

  • My POS fuckwit would not sign a post-nup because she thought I was trying to steal her house and cats. And she could not say she would not cheat again. Must have been the truth and not the drugs or mental illnesses she said she had because when the IRS notice arrived for unpaid taxes on her inherited stocks that she cashed out and gave to him during her drug-bender she invited the guy back to live with her and even kicked her kids out. The real question is how stupid was I to believe anything she said from the very beginning. ugh. lesson learned I hope

  • About time one of these FW got what was coming to them. Marriage contracts should be mandatory in this day. Too many partners pay the price for cheating. There should be a price, aimed at the cheater. Not the partner that kept their word.

      • I think affair partners should be liable to pay chumped wives and kids back for marital assets dissipated during affairs including at least 50% of the value of every bar bender, bistro meal, hotel bill, etc., and 100% of any gifts or cash.

        • Did I say wives and kids? I mean spouses and kids. And no gag agreements added to settlement.

        • I said how much money did you put down on her car? FW said none, she says “why is she asking about my car?, I had a trade in….(POS), she worked PT at our office, FW says she’s asking because of dissipation of assets. Dumb 33 years younger gold digger. Thought she’d get my life.

    • As a chump and a lawyer I’ve told my two adult daughters that marriage contracts like prenups and post-naps are simply one more set of documents to be litigated in a divorce proceeding. My advice (which they are free to disregard of course): buy the fancy dress, have a commitment ceremony and a party but don’t get legally married (and don’t live in one of the few common law states).

      • ☝🏻This !

        My father’s current wife (number 3) worked as a paralegal for years. When they married, they both signed a prenup. She said it’s not worth the paper it’s printed on.

  • After I found CL and put down the hopeium pipe, I told XH to GTFO. I realized he had likely lied and manipulated me the entirety of our 25 year marriage. For 7 months he raised the issue of reconciliation (to stave off my filing for divorce or because he missed my services- no remorse, not based on any desire to love and care for me and our 4 kids). I said I wouldn’t consider risking another round of devastation with him unless he signed a post-nup giving me 85% of assets and maintenance for life (XH made 7x my income). I asked him to get off drugs and alcohol (rehab and AA), get into individual counseling and figure out why he hurt us, and prove through polygraphs that he was sober and abstinate for at least a year before I would consider him as a partner again. He was enraged and wanted to negotiate the 85%. Not sorry at all. I was so naive. I filed, got 82% of assets in divorce, limited maintenance. Thank God he didn’t take me up on my offer. I would never want the hell of being with him now at any price. Never.

  • Although it’s too late for me, I’ve wondered how chumps find pitbull lawyers. My ex certainly managed. Mine had Covid and it showed. I’ve wondered if he would have done better otherwise.

    • Mine was not a pit bull. His was an engineer before attorney, quite the analyst. The other one I was considering was the pit bull. I told a judge from my Pilates class who I was choosing. Her words were you don’t need a pit bull, Chuck will do a good job. I felt better. I knew the only reason she shared was her upcoming retirement. Before my divorce was final the Pitbull gave up his family law cases except for the well heeled.

      Sometimes I think I might have enjoyed the antics of the pit bull with my uncooperative FW but I often heard he’d encourage settlement when assets were nearly gone….if I had unlimited funds I would enjoyed seeing him squirm.

  • Good for her!! 👏 👏 👏

    Surely $7m must dull the pain of infidelity and betrayal considerably, but I just want to acknowledge the this woman may suffer regardless. As we know, cheating hurts like a m***erfucker. Just sayin’.

    • I think a big chunk of money would’ve made me forget about a lot of ex’s bullshit.

      • As they say, “money doesn’t buy happiness”, to which the rejoinder is “it sure makes unhappiness easier to take”

      • Yes, although it doesn’t remove the feelings of betrayal, abuse, lack of respect, at least it mitigates somewhat, knowing that you’ve gained compensation/revenge/justice in a language that a fw understands. If you can’t get them to empathise with the emotional damage they’ve caused you’ve hit them where it hurts, their wallet. And not having to deal with the indignities that life with a greatly reduced income throws at you, especially supporting your children, somehow acts as a balm to faster recovery, I would speculate. From my personal perspective, being put in a position that I never would have chosen for my children and myself, then being forced to take action in response which leaves you in straitened circumstances (ie cleaning the bed after a fw shat in it) through no fault of your own, eats away at one’s enjoyment of life. Knowing I wasn’t going to have to scrape by every week, or worse, not scrape by, would make things exponentially easier.

  • Wish I had thought of this, but I was the one bringing most of the assets into the relationship.

    • No idea if this is legal BUT in the case where chump holds the assets, perhaps in the post-nup the cheater could waive the right to alimony and assets division or lower their percentage from 50/50 to 25% etc.

  • I got a post- nup and it held. I did it for chumpy reasons though; simply couldn’t face the thought that my dad would have to learn that his loser son-in-law made off with commercial real estate that had been in our family. It also wasn’t predicated on unfaithfulness. It was basically “I will agree to try to reconcile with you (he was doing sex addiction counseling) but if it doesn’t work I will give you alimony and not real estate.” We divorced 2 years later and X told his friends that I had ruined him financially. He started living with his girlfriend (but kept his house – cheaper that way) The post-nup stated that the alimony would go to half if he cohabited or remarried. So I started paying him half and he was livid. How dare I?

    I finally got mad and mighty when we went to mediation to settle on a lump sum rather than the monthly alimony. When you settle on a lump sum, it’s all about the present value of the money and how long his life expectancy is. I did some research and found the interest rates and life expectancy charts that were most helpful in proving the lump sum should be much much smaller that he thought. I brought the data in a nice big stack. When he balked, I said that I would actually love to go to court no matter the cost – just on principle. I said I wanted to be able to tell my story and be heard in a court of law. He thought about thought about that story and immediately agreed to my lump sum offer. It was the only bit of real justice that I ever experienced through the whole shit show. I am so grateful for it.

    • Wow! So badass, Kathleen!! Good for you!💪

      To newbies, I want to add here that threatening going to court often seems to work to get cheaters to agree to terms. So capitalize on their desire to keep up appearances.

    • Way to go Kathleen. At least you experienced some feeling of justice. My FW was taking the hard line with me until we sat with attorneys and retired judge (separate rooms) and my attorney showed every piece of evidence to the retired judge (from his home made porn with Schmoopie to the money transfers to Schmoopie and more). It was a turning point because immediately after that (and the retired judge’s opinion of what he thought I should get) he settled. Oddly, he has started doing exactly what was agreed upon and has started paying me. I think a lot of it has to do with his worries over any of the evidence getting out (some of it our son found on his shared photo account) and damaging his image (oddly enough people really don’t like him). Our son is NC. Of course FW is trying to press me to intevene with my son. My response is that is not my problem. I don’t have any power over my son who is an adult and in the Navy. Sorry but I can only control myself. The only real super power that have (according to FW) is the ability to make men cheat (although he is the only cheater I was involved with).
      No matter what I am just glad at the end of the month, I will be divorced. Schmoopie won the pick me dance!!!

      • CFANM….I’ve been following your postings for a while – so glad the end is near.

  • I think it is great that the post-nup held. If I ever meet anyone I would consider marrying again, there will be a strong pre-nup. I’m too old to argue over assets.

    I’ve done a lot of work with my financial planner and lawyer, and still, I feel there is more to do. I am trying to close two family estates, and make sure my mother’s assets are secure to pay for her long-term care. My parents were unhappily married for 40 years and started off with nothing. My mother was so tired of my father’s mental and verbal abuse she just wanted out. He thought he could starve her into begging to come back. It did not go well for him. He lost contact with his adult children until he “voluntarily” gave my mother more of what she deserved. Ironically, some of his well-guarded retirement income will end up taking care of my mother, anyway. I ended up as executor of his estate, and my brother’s estate. My mother will be taken care of and should never be expected to starve or beg again.

    Point is, there are things everyone should expect from a marital spouse. If respect, fidelity, and financial responsibility are part of the marriage agreement, there should be harsh financial penalties for fraud and intentionally causing pain or health dangers. If we work to change our culture, we can work to change our laws. Divorce is not just an inconvenience. It should be a serious examination of malfeasance in the course of the union. Marriage should not shield thieves from conviction of crimes.

    Bravo to this woman for having 7 million reasons to comfort her. She obviously gave him a chance, but he wrote his own sentence for breaking the agreement. So Sad, Too Bad!

    • It was more than the 7 million too. He had to turn over the house, pay the upkeep to the tune of $2000/month until the youngest child turned 18, plus the money for child support and I think he had to pay the taxes on the family home until then too.

  • “That meeting lasted more than six hours. Mr. Lloyd provided information at that meeting that, among other things, his father’s estate was valued at about $50 million and that he expected to receive, after taxes, about $12 million. At that time, his father was 78, was attended to by an aide, and was in very poor health. At trial, Mr. Lloyd admitted that both of his attorneys advised him against signing the Agreement, and in particular, they opposed the increase in the lump sum payment from $5 million to $7 million.”

    I can’t stop laughing.

  • Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!! She’s laughing all the way to the bank!!!!!

  • Common brain glitch in FWs: to excel at lying, but have poor impulse control and no ability to fully grasp the multiple negative consequences that can result from their lying and cheating.

    • “to excel at lying, but have poor impulse control and no ability to fully grasp the multiple negative consequences that can result from their lying and cheating.”

      Yep, and they truly believe they won’t get caught, and if they do they can bullshit their way out of it, and land on top. After all they are the smartest in the room. (just ask them).

      My fws favorite saying to me when I made a mistake was “if I put your brain in a gnats ass it would rattle”.

      Maybe so, but I am not the one that blew up his whole career, filed bankruptcy, and blew up my relationship with my son after our D. The smart one did all that.

      • Your ex turned out to be a really dummy, didn’t he ? And you were long gone and didn’t get any blowback. Consequences 🤣🤣🤣

        • Yeah, he really did some stupid shit. The gambling and subsequent bankruptcy happened several years after our D.

          Honestly, I thought he and his whore would walk arm in arm into the life I helped him build, he destroyed that dream for her fairly quickly, he was busted soon after they married. I have no way of knowing for sure, but I suspect the mayor was waiting for them to wed to prevent her filing a lawsuit against the city. He likely thought if he did it before they wed, fw wouldn’t marry the whore and the city would be at risk.

          I know I was lucky to escape it, much as it hurt at the time. I still find it hard to believe how utterly stupid he was. But truth was he was destroying his (our) life as we were building it. I just didn’t know it. It all started to unravel when someone filed an ethics complaint against him.

  • The FW recently got married (not to the OW), less than 2 years after D-day.

    I met a new friend, that coincidentally knew a relative of his, and she told me that his new wife made him sign a pre-nup with a $500,000 infidelity clause.

    So with all of his “god is good” and “therapy” and treatment for “sex addiction”, and her Christianity, she still doesn’t trust him. She knows he cares about money above all else.

    Of course, she would have to catch him, and he’s tricky. She said “I do” to being the marriage police for the rest of her life. Congrats on the sparkly turd groom.

  • At first I was mad at myself for not insisting on a post-nup after DD#1. But now I realize it would have been used as a roadmap of “how to get away with it” and a game of whack-a-mole with me. For EVERYTHING is a game to be won by a FW.

  • So we have two reasons for snarking and schadenfreude today.
    Three actually. Somebody in California put up a billboard that said Musk, STFU with a picture of duct tape over his face. Lol.

  • Hahaha!

    If she’s on here, she should take her winnings and use it to help change no fault divorce laws around the world!

  • He probably thought he could talk her out of it, or get out of it somehow. So much for that! Good for the court!

  • >
    %d bloggers like this: