Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

FLASH! FROM LIZ SMITH | 04/17/2009 3:00 pm

LIZ SMITH FLASH! Mrs. Mel Gibson: What Took You So Long?

Liz Smith
FLASH! London newspapers say “Good-bye, Mr. Squeaky Clean” to Mel Gibson, and now BetOnline.com is posting odds, known as the
“over/under,” on the amount of his divorce after 28 years of marriage. 

I reported the other day that Hollywood and the world is pretty much asking, “What took her so long?” in the matter of Mel’s lovely wife Robyn, who has given him six boys and a girl and a lot of patience.

As the man we all simply adored in the “Lethal Weapon” movies became a headline-making drunk, anti-Semite, minimizer of women (he denies he called a lady cop “Sugar Tits”), crucifixion-fixated Roman Catholic and philosopher about domestic bliss (“Life is about love and commitment and screw anyone who thinks that’s a cliché!”) – we can now look forward as Mel divvies up with Robyn their houses in Malibu, Fiji, Costa Rica and a South Pacific Island, plus his personal fortune, estimated at $350 million plus.

Here’s where the betting comes in. The “over” is favored at minus-150 or 1-to-1.5 odds. Meaning if a bettor believes the settlement will exceed $350 million, they must risk $150 for every $100 they would like to win.

The “under” carries odds of plus-120 or 1.2-to-1 odds. You’d win $120 for every $100 risked if the settlement comes in under $350 million.

BetOnline.com says, “Historically, our betting market has proven to be quite accurate in predicting future events. We did a ton of volume on last year’s presidential election and the odds, once the public money weighed in, correctly predicted that Obama would win early on.” 

I still think Mrs. Mel Gibson might have begun having second thoughts about her marriage after Mel confessed that his blamelessly Anglican wife would suffer eternal damnation for not being a Catholic and she would not be able to accompany him into heaven.

37 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Frannie Em
He should be more concerned about his own Catholic ass.  She is going to get her freedom and be very rich.  She must have loved him to stay with him so long, because if she wasn’t catholic why would she stay?
By Frannie Em on 04/17/2009 3:32 pm
DeBúrca obj
The little I’ve heard about Mel Gibson’s father makes me think the apple didn’t fall far from the tree. This is a guy who thinks in black and white and appears to live his life preaching ultra-conservative Catholicism on the one hand and making irrational, knee jerk decisions on the other. Perhaps Gibson’s wife took so long to divorce him because she actually BELIEVED the Catholic dogma about divorce, etc. 
By DeBúrca obj on 04/17/2009 3:33 pm
Rachel F

"Perhaps Gibson’s wife took so long to divorce him because she actually BELIEVED the Catholic dogma about divorce, etc. "

She’s not Catholic, but you never know, she might have "picked it up". More than anything else, though, I’d guess that she let her heart guide her head; too often women keep holding on, thinking that, sooner or later, things will work themselves out. Sometimes, you gotta cut your losses and move on. I’m glad she’s finally figured that out.

"The little I’ve heard about Mel Gibson’s father makes me think the apple didn’t fall far from the tree."

I agree with you about that. Two loonies…

By Rachel F on 04/17/2009 4:16 pm
DeBúrca obj
Well, she wouldn’t necessarily have to be Catholic to believe it. Maybe she really thought it was her duty to stay in the marriage.
By DeBúrca obj on 04/17/2009 5:03 pm
Rachel F
That’s very true. "Religious duty" can be a dangerous thing. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problems with religion when not used to control and imprison people…but all too often, that’s what it is used for, by controlling and manipulative people. At least, though, whatever the cause, she got out eventually. :-)
By Rachel F on 04/17/2009 5:20 pm
Frannie Em
There had to be a reason, maybe it was the children.
By Frannie Em on 04/17/2009 8:02 pm
Helen O'Reilly

Oh, to hell with him.

By Helen O'Reilly on 04/17/2009 3:46 pm
Lisa Kaplan

I doubt he’s getting there himself, he shouldn’t worry about her.

By Lisa Kaplan on 04/17/2009 3:53 pm
Diana T

His wife is going to hell, and he is the one with the mistress. Hmmm.  I guess he has his own definition of moral justice.  I hope she soaks him dry….

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1652533/oksana_pochepa_claims_to_be_real_mel.html?cat=49 

By Diana T on 04/17/2009 4:16 pm
Laura Ward
As a "devout" Catholic, you’re not supposed to marry a non Catholic.
By Laura Ward on 04/17/2009 4:50 pm
Elizabeth Bennett
Keep up.  The Vatican changed that decades ago.
By Elizabeth Bennett on 04/17/2009 6:07 pm
Laura Ward
I guess our priest gave us a hard time for marrying a non-Catholic? In our parrish in Texas the priest kept asking those of us marrying non-Catholics if we was sure we wanted to marry a non-Catholics when we went through the mandatory weekend retreat to counsel us before we married. This was in 1982. We still had to promise to raise the children Catholic if we wanted to be married in the church. Out of 10 couples, three of us were marrying non-Catholics. The priest was not encouraging to the mixed couples. That’s what I meant. Not that we couldn’t. More like we shouldn’t. In the end he was right. We got divorced in 1993.
By Laura Ward on 04/17/2009 8:37 pm
Elizabeth Bennett

My parents had a "mixed" marriage and my father left the Catholic church to marry my mother.  When they changed the rules a few decades later, my folks were miffed that these rules that had been so disruptive to them were so easily changed.   Anyway, there is no longer a requirement to raise the kids Catholic.  See http://www.usccb.org/laity/marriage/marriagefaqs.shtml  But individual priests could definitely have an attitude about the whole thing.  I know that my father was quite willing to leave the Church in part because one priest had given a sermon against "mixed"marriage all the while glaring at my great uncle who was married to a  [gasp!  the horror!]  Episcopalian.  

Sorry you had such a bad experience.  Nowadays they have programs to teach couples how to make the commitment work, or so I hear.  

By Elizabeth Bennett on 04/17/2009 9:00 pm
Laura Ward
After thinking about my experience and reading your emails, it occurred to me that my niece is getting married in November to a non-Catholic. So I called my sister just now about today’s rules (my sister also married a non-Catholic in 1985, however, she is still very happily married and he’s a wonderful man). My sister says her experience was nothing like mine but she was at a different parish than mine. My sister says she finds the rules of today are the same as 1985 except that today they have to pay $400 for that engagement counseling to let them know what they may encounter being married to a non-Catholic (we don’t remember paying anything back then). My sister says (and she asked her husband who was sitting next to her) if they felt as discouraged as our group was and they said they didn’t feel they had been. I guess this means our group had a priest who had a certain mind frame he presents to non-Catholics. Who knows? But since we were parisheners at that Church, we had no choice but to go to that priest. However, at this Church in Houston, Texas in 2009, they still say the children have to be raised Catholic. So I’ll show her your email. Wonder what’s going on? Another strict priest? Thanks for that website! My entire family will be very appreciate in having our Catholic questions answered. By the way, in 1928 Houston, Texas, my Catholic grandmother married my non-Catholic grandfather. The priest told her she had to wear black and he would only marry them in his small parrish office which meant they couldn’t have many guests. On their 50th anniversary, she finally had a white wedding and her five granddaughters were her bridesmaids and the wedding was huge.
By Laura Ward on 04/17/2009 9:31 pm
Elizabeth Bennett
Glad that link was helpful to you!  That wedding in 1928, dressed in black, how peculiar the priests were back then.  Still some priests would not have performed that wedding at all back then. 
By Elizabeth Bennett on 04/19/2009 5:48 pm