If you want to see some tension pop off between some people just be around when someone’s rich relative dies and leaves a will. When that will is revealed there is always enough tension in the room its’s read in to cut with a butter knife. The reason for the tension is a will is one of those things that never ever pleases everybody. You will see me write that again.
Such is the case with the late David Bowie’s will.
That will got a lot of folks up on their “hind legs”.
Surprising to me is the people that are upset with the will are not the usual suspects (the family) – it’s the general public. And they took to those personal soapboxes known as Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, blogs, and whatever other personal accounts that hosted them to let their displeasure and pleasure (to be fair) be known.
Well, let’s examine the will to see what triggered the copious comments about it.
The 20-page will, prepared in 2004, has been filed in Surrogate’s Court in Manhattan on Friday. It said Mr. Bowie’s estate was worth as much as $100 million, but it contained no breakdown of his holdings.
Here are the highlights of the will.
Widow Iman Abdulmajid will receive half of Bowie’s estate as well as his penthouse in Manhattan
Of the rest of his estate, 25 percent goes to Duncan Jones, his son from his marriage to the former Mary Angela Barnett; and 25 percent to his daughter from his marriage to Ms. Abdulmajid Jones, Alexandria Zahra Jones, through a trust because she is under 18. He left his mountain retreat in Ulster County, N.Y., to his daughter through the trust.
Mr. Bowie left $2 million to Corinne Schwab, who is known as Coco and was his longtime personal assistant. In a codicil from 2007, he left Ms. Schwab his stock in a company called Opossum Inc. He left $1 million to Marion Skene, who was Mr. Jones’s nanny.
The will named two executors, Mr. Bowie’s business manager, William Zysblat, and a lawyer in London, Paddy Grafton Green. But documents filed with the will indicated that Mr. Green had stepped aside, leaving Mr. Zysblat as the sole executor.
Okay. Now some of Mr, Bowie’s beneficiaries might not feel his estate was distributed fairly or equally. But as I said earlier there is always someone involved in willed distribution of property that’s not going to be happy. In the case of David Bowie’s will even folks that are not involved in the distribution of his estate is unhappy.
The wifey / ex-wifey thingy seemed to be a sore spot with most folks.
Some questioned why would Iman receive an entire half of the money for herself. Then others asked what did the late Bowie leave for first wife, Angie, whom rockstar had been married to in his early 20’s-30’s between the years of 1970-1980.
I’m among those that defend Iman’s half. Come on, the woman is his wife and Mother of one of his children. Yeah, I get one crux of the opposer’s arguments that Iman has her own money – to that I say “so what? Bowie would have been well within legal and moral rights to leave he a larger percentage if so chose to do so. Or to all of it to her with the trust SHE would have divided out among the children. Now that would have been something to talk about. But he didn’t.
As far as his first wife of 9 years Angie goes – yes she was there when he got his come up and bore him a child but she is his FORMER wife. Had he not remarried I’d take the middle ground on this one and could see Angie receiving a noteworthy disbursement.
What folks should be doing is learning a lesson out of the wife / x-wife debates they’re triggering. That lesson is as casual as folks embrace divorce these days, if you’re marrying wealth you may want to consider a prenup.That way you don’t mess around and get divorced out of what you feel your value was worth to the relationship and the wealthy one doesn’t get fleeced by sympathetic and tunnel vision judges.
Wills of the rich and famous will always draw the ire of society. That society will quarterback the departed decisions 9 ways to Sunday and then rewind and do it again. Why? Because they put themselves in the shoes of the recipients. And we all know what? Almost no will recipient is satisfied with their piece of the pie.
The GeoGee Experience 
Hello, It is crazy that anyone would question someone else’s will. It is a private affair even if you are famous. I’m a follower of Bowie’s, have analysed his work as a music analysis and been a major fan since 8 years old. Angie Bowie was no longer part of his life and she actually had a ban on her to ever speak of David to the press for 10 years because she would use any means to tarnish him and his career. People are allowed to move on and leave people behind them, a healthy thing to do if someone is detrimental to your life and health. Let the man rest in peace, he was a very thoughtful giving person and once in an interview he mentioned he was wanting to have money to leave to his family, that was his drive to get rich and I don’t think he was thinking of Angie when he said that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That muzzle on the mouth is a long time to have placed on for 10 years and understand why it was needful. Defamation of character is nothing to tamper with regardless of bitterness. That tongue is dangerous, a “blowtorch”. The man never mentioned, publicly, his ex-wife nor gave indications nor expressed regrets her being a part of his earlier years and didn’t have to it was understandable. At any opportune time, he never failed to admit the error of his ways. There’s plenty real documentary circulating that reveals their life with the drama. Quite sure somewhere in their life, had reconciled their differences, her ‘change’ for the better in personality, attitude and if there were some forgiving there might (maybe) have been inherited considerations. ”Lipstick and Back Stage Passes” is not worth selling one self short. That tongue is dangerous and so is the hurt and anger that go along with it. David Jones made up for it as a human being.
LikeLike