CANTON — Mitt Romney’s sworn testimony in a post-divorce lawsuit against Staples founder Tom Stemberg was unsealed on Thursday at Norfolk Probate and Family Court.
The suit was filed in 1990 by Stemberg’s ex-wife, Maureen Sullivan Stemberg, who sought to amend the couple’s financial agreement after Staples went public in 1989 and began trading at 10 times the stock value she had received in the divorce a year earlier. Romney, now the Republican nominee for president, testified during the lawsuit in June 1991; the nature of his testimony was not immediately clear on Thursday.
Comments
Uninstalling Obama. ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 90% complete
So the Globe is allying with Gloria Allred to try and create an October surprise for the Romney campaign centered around Ms. Sullivan, a woman who believes she was treated unfairly in a divorce proceeding against one of Romney's friends, a person whose company Romney invested in back in the 1980s? I'm guessing Romney's involvement is over testimony related to valuation concerning Staples illiquid, pre-IPO stock. I'm also guessing that this is intended to reverse the gains Romney has made in closing the gender gap with the President over the month of October. This is so embarrassing for the Globe. Great day for Ms. Allred though. Globe is much more prestigious than the National Enquirer, or at least it was.
The Globe and other media will stop at nothing to get Benghazy off the front page. They want to continue to falsely accuse Romney of a war on women. In this case the Judge wisely won't let the ex-wife speak about the documents. Obama made terrible decisions in Libya and should be held accountable. Four Americans died and all the media is concerned with is records from a twenty year old divorce case. It's a shame that politics has sunk to such a low level.
The judge didn't refuse to allow the ex-wife to speak; he refused to modify a prior ruling without a motion being filed. No wisdom exercised there, just a legal technicality. The motion will be filed, and then, a ruling will be made...which you may find wise, or you may find ridiculous, depending on what the ruling is, and your point of view.
If, in fact, Romney lied under oath, isn't that something for us all to consider before we vote? And if there was a lie, and the intention was to undermine a woman's attempt to get a fair divorce settlement from her husband, isn't that indicative of a less-than-supportive attitude towards at least one woman?
Let the facts come out...
msccc3, This was not about the original settlement. The ex-wife went back after the company went public to try and get more money.
Uninstalling Obama. ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 90% complete
I gotta say, even as an Obama supporter, this is pretty silly to be on the front page of the Globe's website. Really?
So in 1986, Staples had 1 store and Bain made a $685,000 investment. What percentage of the company did they own? Also, what percentage of the company did Tom Stemberg own? With those two facts we can at least establish the total value of the firm at the time and the value owned by the founder. How much did The ex-wife get in the settlement? I think I did read that she got 500,000 shares and sold them for $2 a share (she should have held on a little while obviously). But still, she netted more than Bain Capital's initial investment. And those are just the shares she received. I'm pretty sure she also got cash. This woman is upset, which is obvious from her online postings (not hard to find). But she's also a complete side show.