‘Crazy’ Li a bigamist, claims wife

Kim Lee, the estranged wife of Crazy English founder Li Yang, has accused him of bigamy Tuesday, the latest twist in an increasingly bitter divorce case.　

Lee posted on her Sina microblog at 4:51 pm Tuesday that she "came to know today that powerful and rich people can use bigamy as a way to postpone a divorce settlement."

However, Li's lawyer denied the claims on Tuesday, insisting that the couple only legally married in 2010. Lee's lawyer has said this new information may affect the divorce settlement.　

The couple's divorce has dragged on for more than a year, after Lee alleged she had been beaten and abused by Li during their marriage. She uploaded photos showing her bruises to her microblog in September 2011 and filed for divorce in November 2011, demanding joint custody of their three daughters and an equal split of their property.

"Li's lawyer suddenly 'discovered' that Li did not officially end his [first] marriage when he married me. More than a year has passed and there have been three court hearings [about the divorce], but it's taken until today to find out that when he married me he was already married. This is magical. Here comes a new English word - bigamy," wrote Lee. The post was written in Chinese except for the word "bigamy."

Li and Lee had two wedding ceremonies - one in Las Vegas, US, in 2005, and another in 2010 in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province. Their first child was born in 2002.

Shi Ziyue, Li's lawyer, told the Global Times Tuesday that the first wedding in Las Vegas was not legally binding.　

"The marriage in Las Vegas needed to be notarized in a Chinese embassy or consulate to be legally binding in the Chinese mainland," said Shi, adding that this was not done.　

According to Shi, Li divorced his first wife in 2006 and married Kim on July 7, 2010 in Guangzhou. Only the marriage in 2010 is legally accepted in China.

"Besides, Kim has Li's divorce certificate. She didn't want to hand it over to the court because she wants to get more money," Shi claimed.

Lee's side has said that they believe she is entitled to a share of Li's property and assets from 2000, from which time they were in a committed relationship, while Shi argued that the property should be divided only from 2005, China.org.cn reported in August, after the third and latest court hearing.

But the date of Li's divorce to his first wife was ignored, said Shi, because everyone was focused on his assets.

"I think that people, including me, Kim's lawyer and the judge were all fooled about the date of their marriage. Both Li and Kim did not explain this at the beginning of their lawsuit," said Shi, who is now stressing that any property division should start from 2010.

Lee's lawyer, Qi Lianfeng, told sina.com Tuesday that he did not discover until this year that Li was divorced in 2006, and this fact may influence the division of property as the couple were not legally married between April 2005 and November 2006.

Qi told the Global Times Tuesday that he was now unable to answer any questions about this issue.

"Kim said that at this phase, she doesn't want the involvement of the media. Sina phoned me as soon as Kim's microblog was posted, but she asked me to say nothing more shortly after that interview," he said.

The high-profile divorce has been conducted under public and media scrutiny, with frequent microblog postings from both sides.

Lee has been lauded for raising the hidden issue of spousal abuse, while Li has denied that he behaved violently toward his wife, putting it down to cultural misunderstandings.

"Only constant abuse can be called domestic violence, and we just fought several times back in 2006 and 2009," Li told reporters outside Chaoyang district court in December, 2011.

Li's Crazy English company, founded in 2001, has 32 branches and 200 employees in major cities in China.

Its total value is 20 million yuan ($3 million), according to information shown on the Guangzhou City Administration of Industry and Commerce website, but he also owns a number of properties, according to information released during the court hearings.