You might know her, but you dont know him so back off. He is a good guy. It makes me so mad that these stories are being posted without all the facts being posted along side them. The bruises are from a bar fight with a girl, not from josh. A lot of the charges against him where dropped. Get over yourselves. This is their life, let them figure it out in peace.

well said

If she disappears she doesn't have to give him NOTHIN!!!

If he's such a good guy, why hasn't he been in his children's lives???? I'll bet he hasn't paid a dime to her for the kids. Any person that abandons their children is the biggest POS this planet has. He shouldn't get one dime. The judge should rule that Holli gets it all for raising the kids on her own. The POS can go to hell and go by his own lottery ticket.

He never abandoned them! They split on a mutual agreement and he left her EVERYTHING. And at this moment he is in school, making something of himself. Back off, you dont know them.

And what did EVERYTHING that he left her consist of?? Bad Debts??

Wow. I bet if this situation were reversed, you would be saying that she deserved the money because he beat her and would pursue the law to the ends of the earth to make sure she got it. I'm not saying that he "deserves" the money, but for the love of God people can we not see the mass of hypocrisy here.

The fact is, everybody's assuming and deciding from unsubstanuated facts that one is satan himself and the other is the witless angel who was drawn into the marriage.. You've made up their mind and the stones are being tossed. Fact is, their STILL married.. In a community property state, everything is shared 50/50.. It doesn't stipulate, "Only the women has this right".. Now I agree, women suffer the most simply because (1) they want someone to be the breadwinner and not take responsibility for themselves or (2) the husband refuses them to get out and work.. Either way this is the primary reason women are the victims in separation and divorce BUT that doesn't mean if they were the breadwinner and they became rich that the husband would be exempt from their share.. Works the same in this case. Stop looking at it personally and realize what law is in effect here.. Don't allow the lawyers to profit here as they do in all endeavors, it's a simple open and shut case and it IS unfortunate that she has to do it, but if the shoe was on the other foot would you see it the same way as you do now..?

I'm sick of our liberal country discriminating against males, it hasn't been but a few years where a New York guy won the lotto, but he was legally separated from his wife and the media ran a virtual assassination campaign against the winner! He was forced to share 50/50! I'm sick of this two-bit country and its' claims of equality! Men are not treated equal in anything, in marriage, in divorce, in custody hearings, and most assuredly not when it comes to child support or alimony! The idiots that condemn the husband know nothing about the relationship and should keep their mouth shut!

Unfortunately, most of the time it's the man who takes off and leaves the woman with the kids to fend for themselves.

Men are not treated equal in anything

Really? What about the same pay for the same work? Guess the facts don't count?

I work in the IT field and see the opposite (of what you're spewing) every frilling day.

legal Texan, Maybe you should woman up.

To "Legal texan" sounds like you have a little bit of an anger issue to work out there pard. Have another beer, it'll be alright.

Julie, I'm an IT manager and there's no such thing as pay disparity based on gender. If you have a lower salary it is probably because you have poor negotiation skills or your performance is not top notch.

Stop worrying about everyone else and concentrate on what you can do.

You must be friends with guy. It is unfortunate when you have to share with someone who left you and your children to fend for themselves. Has he given her 1 dime since he left to help with anything for the kids?? I doubt it. And now he comes out of the woodwork and wants his share. Puh-lease!! It is VERY unfortunate.

toria, and what do you know about the woman? You state you "doubt it" and make assumptions but (as JackLee says, "although its unfortunate") the law is the law. Does it suck? Yes.

During her time of not coming forward (it was due to her talking to lawyers), I would like to know what her lawyers told her. Now that would be a story.

Im estranged from my wife and if I won the ticket I would split it with her,Im still married to her and we both could get on with our lives,I didn't beat her we didn't have children. god that much money why are they even fighting about it,just divide it and move on

You hit the nail on the head.

Yes, but did they have kids?? Was she the one raising the kids?? If so, then she was entitled. If no kids are involved that's a different story.

If so, then she was entitled. If no kids are involved that's a different story.

Wow! I've never heard of the "we're separated with no kids and still married but it's my lottery ticket" defense.

Where did you get your legal degree? Gonzaga? No, more like Kellogg Corn flakes.

Kelloggs Corn Flakes? Now that WOULD be a feat.. Unfortunately, your correct in your assumptions (notice how often the word 'unfortunate' crops up on this subject?).. I don't think kids should make a difference in this particular situation, in other words, "If there were kids involved then the law could bend it's legalities".. WRONG!! It has to do with marriage NOT with children. Children are the weapons that the mother has to threaten with, NOT to say, "Hey! you won the lottery and I've got the kids.. Gimme half!".. nor, "I have the kids, all this money I won belongs to me and the children, tuff!"..

AND vice-versa Stevie.. (don't forget that).. Of course, before I would agree to split half the winnings (which I would have to do by law) I would stipulate, as a condition, that an immediate divorce be issued and signed so that IF I were lucky enough to win TWO lotteries, then this one I WOULDN'T have to share..

@baby girl-----------------------What a retarded idea, you know nothing about their lives!

It wouldn't gel anyway.. That would be after the fact.. She won it in HER name thus the law is standing. And before you bring it up, no.. she couldn't put her half in a trust for the kids then sue for half of his portion.

Actually 95 million (as she won 190 million).. I'm sure it was a typo. And your right, it would settle the whole enchilada.. I would still be grinning from ear to ear over my winnings.

You right concerning the 'drooling' mouth piece ;>)) but she won 190 million.. Thats more than some 3rd world countries can even count.. I don't think we should waste our time feeling sorry for either of them (nor the lawyers).. We should feel sorry for us who DIDN'T win.. Waaaaa!!!

Let's not be so harse angieb.. The correct definition is "Rich white trash" now.

What if she couldn't afford a divorce at the time??? Is she a moron because she didn't have money to do what she wanted to all along.

Yes.

It's not about that, it's about that he abandoned his children. If rolls were reversed and she left and he was raising the kids on his own. He won the lottery, I would say the same thing, She shouldn't get a dime.

He shouldn't get anything just on the principle that he abandoned his children. Anyone that does that (man or woman) is the scum of the earth and should rot in hell.