We got a request to cover this story when it first came out, but honestly I don’t have a lot of interest in Gossip Girl’s Kelly Rutherford. Still, it’s very sad for her and it’s an interesting custody tale. There are comparisons to be made with what Halle Berry is attempting in her custody battle. Rutherford’s ex husband, a German man named Daniel Giersch, received permission by a judge to keep their two children: son Hermes, 5, and daughter Helena, 3, with him in Monaco. Rutherford will have to fly to visit them whenever she can.
Giersch has been barred from entering the US and his visa was revoked for some unknown reason. Rutherford accused him during their divorce of dealing drugs and weapons, which could explain it, although as far as we know those are just unfounded accusations. People states that “just the accusation is enough to revoke his visa.” Apparently Giersch, his parents, and his two children are now living in Monaco, where Giersch’s parents own a home. The whole thing sounds like a heartbreaking mess. Dan Abrams wrote an excellent editorial for ABC News about what a poor decision this was on the custody judge’s part if you’re interested. Judges are supposed to rule in the best interests of the children, and it’s hard to see how a German father raising them in Monaco against the mother’s wishes is in their best interest. They grew up in the US, their father and grandparents are German and they’re supposed to learn French now since they’re living in Monaco. It’s also unknown exactly what Giersch does for a living, and it might not be arms dealer-level shady, but it still sounds shady.
Anyway Rutherford was photographed at the airport in Nice reuniting with her kids. (Photos are at this link on TMZ) A new TMZ report claims that she thinks Giersch called the paps:
Kelly Rutherford’s ex-husband set up a photo op at a French airport on Sunday where the actress arrived to visit her children … violating a court order in the process — or so Kelly is telling friends.
One of Kelly’s close friends — who recently spoke to the actress in France — tells TMZ, the “Gossip Girl” star was shocked when she saw photos of her arrival at the airport in Nice this weekend surfacing on the Internet, and believes her ex is to blame for leaking her location.
The friend says Kelly believes … if her ex Daniel Giersch really did set up the shot — it would be a violation of a court order against exposing the couple’s kids to the media.
In the photos, Kelly looks happy — hugging her kids while they wave a sign reading “Welcome Super Mama” — but now, she’s super pissed.
As you know, Kelly and her ex are embroiled in a bitter custody war. A judge recently named Giersch the “residential parent,” meaning the kids have to live in France because he’s banished from the U.S. Kelly still lives in the States, and has to fly to France to see her kids for her half of the custody share.
Kelly plans to fight the ruling. Reps for both Kelly and Giersch had no comment.
Can’t these people just get along for the sake of their kids? Was her ex trying to rub it in that he has custody now, or was he trying to genuinely be nice and welcoming? I think that question is answered by the fact that he called photographers ahead of time. I don’t think Kelly is blameless, she admitted hiring a private detective to spy on her ex, and she still owes the PI $58,000 in unpaid services. More than anything, I feel for the kids. At least they have their grandparents there to care for them. That’s all I’ve got.
These are file photos of Kelly with her kids. Kelly, Daniel and Hermes are shown in 2008. Credit: FameFlynet
That is so sad, for everyone involved. If he can’t enter the US then it wouldn’t be fair for him either if he lost. But as a mother I can’t imagine being that far away from my baby girl. Even if she does make me want to tear out my hair.
Thanks Celebitchy for covering this story – I certainly am glad you covered it… Where are the original photos from the airport with the kids holding ballons?
This story is disturbing on so many levels:
1) True story: This judge, based in California, ordered 2 American minors to live in Monaco, with their German father, with their American Mom to go and visit them, using the 6 plane tickets purchased for her each year? Really? Um, no Judge, no.
2) Not to over analyze, but a woman in the public eye, several months pregnant, decides to divorce her husband, who is the father of her young son and unborn child. Trying to think about this neutrally, but imagine what could have provoked her actions, and the one thing that comes to mind is FEAR!
3) Her husband had his US visa revoked for who knows what “aka: shady practices”. There is no way that the US would do this lightly, absolutely no way (especially not to a European passport holder). I would put money on the fact that there is something Ms. Rutherford discovered (or no longer could turn a blind eye to) and she felt FEAR from what could happen to her/her children at the hands of her husband, and maybe decided to file for divorce. Maybe she did give investigators enough info that she learned to get him booted. The US has enough illicit problems to deal with its own citizens, let alone with foreigners.
While we speculate, just imagine if you were in Ms. Rutherford’s shoes: a single Mom who tried to be a good sport and sent your kids to stay with their father for the summer, to learn that they are court-ordered to live there forever. I mean we all were rooting for Katie Holmes to take Suri and run based on speculation about Tom Cruise; I can only imagine why this case has turned out this way…
I think the judge ruled that the children should stay with their dad, because their mother can visit them (her schedule is flexible enough), whereas their father cannot visit them.
So by staying with their dad, they can see both of their parents, whereas by staying with their mom, they can only see their dad when they go to France…
I guess that’s why it’s in their best interests.
But both of the parents seem nuts, so I don’t really think that there is an ideal solution in this matter.
the judge also noted that he took into consideration what he thought were constant attempts by Rutherford to alienate the children from their father and summarily disregarding the court’s rulings that she add the father’s name to the younger child’s birth certificate.
This is a case where the father can not come to the US to spend time with his children and where the mother can not be relied upon to comply with court rulings. I agree with the judge
ohhh that explains it a bit better…
Yes @ Ol cranky – You explained it much more succintly than my long rants below. Thanks.
There is much more to the custody battle than that. I do remember reading quite some time ago that Kelly refused to toilet train their oldest child. She said he would do it when he was “ready”, even though he was about to start preschool (in diapers).
My personal bias opinion.
I even hate to say this… but I suspect Rutherford is as big as nut job as Halle Berry.
And I saw the airport pictures yesterday on the Daily Mail… and I am sorry… but it looks like Kelly was expecting those paps. She did not look remotely surprise to see them. And she manage to look directly into the lenses and smile for them too.
And for the Judge to make the decision to give primary custody to the Father. Living abroad… says a lot to me. And none of it positive.
Not all Mother’s are the best primary care givers. Even wealthy ones.
I thought the same thing about her reaction to the cameras. I also noticed that the dad was being encouraging and smiling with the kids, and the kids had a sign for her. That says a lot to me, that he kept it lighthearted and cheerful for the kids, and let it be about them being excited to see her. No matter what’s going on, it’s not right to act out in front of the kids, and have them affected by the parent’s anger and issues. You’ve got to put them first because even if they don’t know what’s going on, they can certainly sense anger or bitterness.
Agree @Hautie – And the judge even said that Kelly was not doing a good job at co-parenting. She repeatedly refused to put Daniel’s name on the birth certificate even after a court order. She didn’t tell him when she was giving birth to their daughter and she accused him of violence and drugs/arms dealing with South America, which as mentioned above an accusation is all it takes to get a visa revoked. If it is proven that he is shady and a bad guy then I will amend my statements, but until then I think Kelly is the bad guy in all of this. Also, why did she marry some guy who looks just like her. weird. Also, after the judge ordered them into parenting classes she was asked by a reporter what she thought and she said she didn’t see it working. Sounds like someone who had no intention of co-parenting. When couples split and one is a foreign national that is often the first maneuver a selfish spouse/parent does is try to get the other one kicked out. I have seen it done a thousand times. The same thing in regular custody cases all a mom has to do is say bad things about the dad and immediately she is given temporary full custody while the court sorts out the accusations (same thing Halle did to Gabriel). So the father is already starting at a disadvantage. Also, remember Kelly Rutherford left her first husband after less than 6 months of marriage because he developed a debilitating heart condition, which he later died of. That is a cold-hearted b*tch. This case and Kelly Rutherford is very similar to Scary Berry and her machinations. Both of them are cold-hearted. I mean Halle abandoned her step-daughter whom she was supposedly in the process of adopting and she had 2 hit-and runs and one of which she claimed amnesia. And scary berry has been inventing reasons to alienating Gabriel from his daughter’s life ever since. It is Kelly’s fault she lost custody. I hope the judge sees thru Scary Berry’s lies too, but then again she is in LA where the bigger celebrity always wins.
Eric Benet said Halle was never in the process of adopting India.I wish people would stop repeating that lie.
However, he did go on record to say how Halle broke his daughter’s heart after she all but abandoned her like an old shoe after her divorce from Eric. She bonded with that girl and acted like a mother. Although she never made formal plans to adopt her, she talked about it to the press about adopting her. I know I’ve read those comments from her interviews more than once.
I’ve heard this women is a total nut. Kids might be better off with dad. And I wouldn’t be surprised if she tipped off the paps.
Her ex husband is lawyer and worked long time in france
My guess is there is some pretty solid evidence that she made false accusations to have his visa revoked. That would go a long way to explaining the judge’s decision. More and more judges are (rightly) cracking down on attempts at parental alienation, Halle best take note!
This. Don’t you hate it when you try to do something smart and it completely backfires?
“As for Giersch’s inability to return to the U.S., a source claims accusations made by Rutherford are responsible for the German businessman’s revoked visa.
“Kelly stated on the record that Daniel was dealing drugs and weapons in South America, which under the Victory Act is considered terrorism,” a source tells PEOPLE, adding it’s all untrue. “Just the accusation is enough to revoke his visa.” Papers show Rutherford is now required to make “good faith efforts” to facilitate his attempts to get his residence right reinstated.”
She thought that by destroying his ability to get a U.S. visa, she would ensure custody for herself. However the judge was on to her little activities and awarded custody to the father instead.
Glad to see the judge acting appropriately here. I have personally seen women try to destroy their children’s relationship with their father purely out of spite. It is unacceptable, and most certainly not in the best interest of the children. The only ones I feel sorry for are the children.
I’m not too familiar with the background of this case, but the points you made seem valid. BTW, what did you mean by “This” at the beginning of your post. Just curious…
In this context ‘this’ means ‘what she said’ 🙂
And agreed that it looks a lot like Rutherford thought this was a way to get the guy out of the picture. Good that the judge didn’t let it work for her.
I agree, some other stuff must be going on for her to lose custody as she has.
Even if it is all on him, and her accusations are true, that’s a good example of know who you’re deciding to create a life with.
For some reason, I have negative feelings about her, like I read something nasty about her. But I can no longer remember what. Is there dirt on her? Or I am just projecting because she seems kind of cold and spiteful?
Didn’t she ditch her husband after he got sick shortly after they were married?
What comes around goes around, as far as I’m concerned.
Oh, I know why you have negative feelings, believe that. This is the vindictive little sea monkey who tossed her new husband overboard after several weeks of marriage when he had the gall to become ill and eventually be diagnosed with cancer. Clearly she was listening to her Walkman when the vows were going.
By the time the In Style celebrity wedding issue was released with lots of photo of her big ol’ wedding, she’d long left him. Now, that’s compassion.
My question: what man would volunteer to be her next carcass when she could treat a husband like this? I know that her first husband survived the treatments so this could make a great campfire story for him.
How many husbands did she have? I read that the husband she left after 6 months of marriage Carlos Tarajano died in 2004 of his illness, I think a heart condition. I wonder what it was like for him to be newly married and you would think happily in love and then get diagnosed with an illness and your spouse leaves you. That had to be devastating to him. It would to me. She is cold-hearted.
http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/4616/et0124.html a link to a story about her first marriage. This story is from when her first husband was still alive.
My bias: a girl needs her mother, plain and simple.
Your views are outdated. A child has just as much need of their father as they do their mother. Thank goodness judges are leaving the dark ages and recognizing this. Not all mothers a good mothers as I have come to see over the years.
I’m sorry, but I disagree, Bobby Sue.
I think kids need GOOD ROLE MODELS, male and female..but not necessarily their bio mom, or bio dad. I am a stepmom to three kids, two boys and a girl. I wanted to crawl under a rock yesterday when I picked my stepdaughter up from her first day of kindergarten. She came running out to me with her boobies on display. Her bio mom sent her to her first day at school with a tank top on that was two sizes too big and stained everywhere, not to mention the skirt that was also too big and mismatched socks. Her hair was also still in the braid I had put it in on Sunday when we sent them back to their mother, meaning that little girl had not showered or bathed in 2 days. Just because you give birth to a child does not mean you are a good mother.
and Rutherford can get on a plane and see her daughter. She can even make arrangements to love near the children permanently and travel only when she’s working
children need both of their parents and parents who are not together as a couple need to learn to co-parent
Yes, a child needs their mother, however if that child’s mother is unfit to parent, abusive, a meth/crack addict, (etc.) it is in the CHILD’S BEST INTERESTS that the mother not raise the child.
Besides, a child needs their father just as much.
I find it strange that a judge would give full custody to the father. If she is a fit mother then it should be joint custody and she should have to take them to visit their father since he can’t come to US but to keep the children their all times in unfair to her.
Joint custody means 50/50.How can do that in 2 different countries.The boy attends school is he supposed to attend school in Monaco for two weeks or a month and transfer to NY for a month?Or stay w Dad for 3 months and mom for 3 months.Im just asking.Everyone I know with joint custody live in same city w ex
Joint custody does NOT mean 50/50. There’s also a difference between “legal custody” and “physical custody.”
Joint Custody n. in divorce actions, a decision by the court (often upon agreement of the parents) that the parents will share custody of a child. There are two types of custody, physical and legal. Joint physical custody (instead of one parent having custody with the other having visitation, does not mean exact division of time with each parent, but can be based on reasonable time with each parent either specifically spelled out (certain days, weeks, holidays, alternative periods) or based on stated guidelines and shared payment of costs of raising the child. Joint legal custody means that both parents can make decisions for the child, including medical treatment, but where possible they should consult the other.
It seems to me that if Rutherford made accusations that caused him to not be admitted into the country, then it’s kinda her own damn fault that he must now carry out his portion of physical custody in another country. It sounds like she gambled in thinking that her accusations would have him barred from visitation and it blew up in her face. I really have no sympathy.
Some people should not have kids. These two fit into that category.
Poor kids – what a sad troubled life they are going to have with these two as parents.
Weren’t the tables turned not too long ago? I mean, I thought I read somewhere that she was making his life a living hell in the beginning of all of this, if I remember correctly. Why on earth can’t parents just look out for their children? Asses.
She’s a beoch and deserves everything she gets! Anyone here remember how she dumped her newly wed husband at the drop of a hat–when he got sick?
I wonder what happened to that guy? He was devastated.
She is a low person and this is her karma
He died with in a few years or less of her leaving him. So sad.
The level this woman stooped to during her divorce and the things she did to keep him away from their children was scary scary.
She’s Halle Berry on steriods. I truly believe that she is mentally ill and could greatly benefit from therapy and modern medicine.
He’s probably a stand up guy, and she told the judge he was an arms and drug dealer, and that pissed the judge off enough to revoke her custody and give the kids to the husband… who can’t leave the country now because he’s had his visa revoked because a lunatic made false accusations against him. Now she called the paparazzi and is trying to blame him. The lady is cray cray, it’s so obvious.
As I recall she also tried to hide the birth of their daughter from him. She’s a special kind of evil and I’m surprise she gets visitation at all.
One thing; beautiful baby….
As far as I know, he is a bussinessmen – an owner of the domain gmail.de. He was involved in a nasty battle with google few years ago, but he won. Google wanted to buy gmail.de for some relatively low price, but he didn’t want to sell it and they sued him. He won and still has all the rights to this popular domain, so he is probably very rich and doesn’t have to do shady things for a living, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that he didn’t do it. Greed can be awful. The same as anger besotting (I don’t know if that’s a correct expression?) some people during the break-up. She wouldn’t be the first person to falsly accuse her ex of the nasty things just to win the custody.
This case seems to be much harder than Berry’s. Both Berry and Aubry can enter the US plus she works there and wants to move to France only to be with her current boyfriend and to piss her ex off, so in my opinion it should be a no-brainer for a judge. Rutherford’s case on the other hand seems to be unsolvable without the good will on both sides. Whatever the judge’s decicion would be, one of the parents and what’s most important – the children, would be harmed. They should work this out together for the sake of their kids and stop with this circus.
While Giersch created g-mail.de in 2000, he didn’t win anything, because it was eventually decided that the domain would fall to Google due to inactivity. While DG had an idea, he didn’t have the resources to do anything with it. Gmail has been used by Google in Germany since 2010.
Giersch is a shady character who likes to sue for the most inconsequential reasons, but I don’t believe the arms/drug accusations.
I wasn’t sure if what I’ve read was true, that’s why I started with as far as I know. I read it in the usually very reliable paper (something like my country’s New York Times) and on some business sites and they claimed it was 100% truth. I checked now and they still do, as well as other non-business sites. They state that he won not one but multiple battles. But I’m not German and I won’t argue, I just repeat what I have read.
While I agree that older children should get 50/50 with each of their parents (barring extreme circumstances), I find it very odd that a judge would do this when they are on completely different continents. That’s odd and seems like it could be detrimental to a child. I have 50/50 with my son’s father (son is almost 5) and the week I go without him is so, so hard…and he only lives 20 minutes away! I can’t imagine the kind of stress and sadness (not to mention financial burden) it would put on me if he was literally thousands of miles away. Just a sad situation for the children 🙁
well the father can’t come to the US to be near his children so the only reasonable ruling would be for the children to live with the father and Rutherford to be the one to travel back and forth. I’m pretty sure the father actually has to pay for Rutherford’s travel and living arrangements when she’s with the children. If she was really so concerned about being so far away from her children, she’d move to be closer to them
@Kim – It is not a lie and I said “supposedly” meaning I know Halle didn’t but she said she did or was going to. And that says a lot about Halle to lie to the world pretending this great love for her step-daughter just to make her look good to the public. What other conclusions can we draw? So I will continue to repeat it because it came out of Halle’s mouth. I remember this way back before I had any idea Halle was a narcissist and a crazy person. This was when I thought she was awesome. I will do the research to see if I can find when she said this but I remember it and others do to and we are not going to forget it anytime soon even if you want us to.
Its a lie that she had started the adoption process according to Eric.She may have said she was planning to adopt or wanted to adopt but according to him no paperwork was ever drawn up.So therefore Halle was never in’the process of adopting’ India according to India’s father.He would have to initiate the paperwork
Yes, but this just proves my point and others who have said the same thing that Halle is a liar and must have done this to make herself look good to the public. So why would we believe anything that comes out of her mouth.
The only reason he lost his Visa is because of accusations SHE made against him. Allegations that turned out to be 100% false, and so nutty that the judge expressed concern. He felt the children were better served by being with their father, based on all of the information exposed during the divorce, and said that since she is a well compensated actress, she could certainly afford to travel to visit her children often.
I agree with a comment earlier. I think she’s sort of a Halle Berry nutjob. The children probably are better off with their father.
I also think that he has to buy her 6 tickets a year to visit the kids. As I mentioned above I believe I read that the judge was also persuaded to give them to the father because Kelly hadn’t shown that she was willing to work with Daniel on visits even. Meaning she would make it hard for him to see his kids and he had shown his willingness to work with her on visitations. Meaning he wasn’t playing tricks on her when it was her time for the kids.
I wondered about the ticket situation. Just b/c she has some extra time in her schedule to go there, doesn’t mean it isn’t costly for her. For example: the tickets, food, lodging etc… I doubt she makes a fortune on GG which will end soon. Also, if she still owes that PI it could be b/c she doesn’t want to pay, or maybe she can’t afford to now. She doesn’t seem to be getting a huge amount of new work either, hence the “flexible schedule”.
I’m not taking sides, b/c I don’t have alot of details, but she does seem a bit vindictive. But, to be fair, I know very little about him.
this vile woman deserves everything she’s got, and she looks like his mother in the last picture.
Frankly, naming a child Hermes should probably be enough to result in loss of custody.
(And yes, she admitted to naming him after the bag company, so it’s not a Greek name).
Agreed!
This woman is koo-koo for Cocoa Puffs. I have no doubt that she called the paps so she could accuse her ex of doing it, and that she accused him of arms dealing to get his visa revoked. Really bit her in the ass, didn’t it?
Edited to add: She totally looks like she’s taking a dump in that gumball photo!
What’s worse is that her spelling of ‘Hermes’ was spelled with an accent aigu instead of grave.
It’s pretty amazing to me that every. single. article I read here about custody fights (okay, Katie Holmes is the big exception, so I guess I should have said “almost every. single. article.,” but let’s go with it for a moment) brings out a million commenters about how cuckoo crazy the woman is. Halle Berry, Heidi Klum, Tameka Foster, Bristol Palin, now this lady. It’s like listening to my ex-husband times a thousand.
Probably just a coincidence.
Do you think THIS was the blind item on Lainey’s site ? versus Klum or JLo. Asking b/c the French “non” seems to fit this. Plus the older child – one she is shown buying candy for – looks a bit developmentally challenged (per frontal pic of the man holding him).
http://www.blinditemsexposed.com/2012/03/not-doting-mother-not-kind-employer.html
Lainey revealed this was Heid Klum yesterday I think in her post on Seal she mentioned the foot rubbing thing again. I think the developmental issues is probably ADD or ADHD.
It does read like her. TBH, I don’t necessarily trust Lainey’s reveals. Sometimes I think they are fueled by her bias against a particular actor or actress. I just don’t see Lainey’s “reach” crossing the border or being as good as TMZ, who would have revealed that stuff about Heidi if that had it.
So my guess is Kelly. She seems too interested in outward appearances to cater to the needs of a special needs child. JMHO.
@The Original Mia – I really like reading Lainey, but I don’t agree with everything she says and also many actors I could care less about so I don’t even read them. But, I don’t necessarily trust any of the blinds on any site for some of the same reasons you mentioned re Lainey. I mean Lainey had the one about the pregnant actress who is old and partying and didn’t plan the baby and it might have developmental issues and it ended up being Uma Thurman, who I could care less about, but I got to thinking that if you had been tipped off that she is pregnant, which wouldn’ be very hard, I mean all you would have to do is look at her and probably know, then you could tell your story to Lainey or TMZ or whomever and anyone could spin this drug abuse story about a pregnant actress and then in a few days we all learn it is Uma and everyone assumes she has been doing drugs because someone made up a blind about her. I mean I don’t know if it is true or not but many of the blinds seem like something that could just have been set up in advance to look scandalous. I can’t stand Heidi anymore and I can believe she has no time for her children. What I wonder though, if this blind is true why would Seal not use that in his custody issues. Or is it because he was never around either? Do any of these hollywood vain types really care about their kids?
Tragic. I would steal them back if I was her, not without my daughter style. No way are they better off with him. No way
Why are they not better off with him? Please in lighten me.
I doubt she is a 24/7 hands-on mom. More likely relies quite a bit on nannies etc. Even if she were- this is what happens in divorce when both parents want to raise the kids. They have to share. The ruling makes it possible to share in this case. If she hadn’t said something to get him denied access to the US, he would have been able to arrange his life so they lived close enough to do the sharing in a more convenient manner for her. Meanwhile, she should do a lot of video chatting. Great way to keep up with kids far far away. A friend’s daughter does this with her boyfriend on another continent, they talk every day using Skype.
I always have so much trouble reading these stories… I guess because it is impossible for me to emotionally distance myself from this sort of thing. I’m a really calm collected person but the one thing that would make totally me lose it and break any law would be if someone took away my children. To me that’s the ultimate violation, I would go wild. I guess this goes to show you really have to choose your partner well, someone who respects you, to avoid any bad surprises…
Did you read what kind of person this woman is?
If not then I suggest you go back and read the other comment and post before you judge her ex.
@Ruby – I understand you and I had to step back a bit on reading about Halle Berry’s custody because this issue is so personal to me as I think it is for many others on here that’s why there is such a discussion about it. The same as it is regarding anything surrounding tom cruise and his cult. This stuff goes beyond gossip and is about real life issues. I know what you are saying about how you would feel if someone took your children away and that is why I understand why sometimes the father’s in these cases get so angry and don’t always behave. I am not saying it is right but I think people like Halle know how to push Gabe’s buttons. Same with Heidi and Seal that’s why we need good judges standing up for the rights of the children and not just the most selfish and rich parent. It seems New York is better at this than California where it always seems whoever has the most money and is the most famous wins.
Kelly is a shrew. She tried to alienate her ex from their kids’ life. Theres nothing right sbout that. Don’t give a fig about the fact he is a German national living in Monaco. He would be in NYC if she hadn’t maligned him in court, making it rather easy for him to get bounced from the US. She deserves to lose custody since she didn’t put the kids first.
As for your concern about the kids speaking the language, they do speak French. They attended a French school in NYC.
Also very young children pick up new languages extremely quickly. Partly because they are little language learning machines, but also because a child’s vocabulary is so small compared with an adult’s, and the things they need to express are so much less complicated. If their grandparents are in Monaco, it’s a good thing for them to speak French. Also German, I imagine. No biggy for kids that age, they can flit between languages easily.
People keep insisting that she is horrible and trying to cut him out completely. But the kids were already over in Monaco visiting him. So it seems that she had at least been following that part of the agreement.
The judge seems out of line here. What about what is best for the kids? They are now having to leave their home, country, school, and friends behind. That would be very difficult. They may come to resent their father for this.
And I have to question how much money Kelly actually has. While she has worked steadily. She is not a big name actress who can demand a large amount. She is the type who will have to continuously work. Especially since unless the order is changes, she is going to spend a fortune to be travelling to France all the time.
If they lived in the US they couldn’t see their father at all – since Rutherford seemed completely uninterested in letting them have a relationship with their father. Plus, you know, that is a situation of her own making. If she hadn’t accused him of arms dealing he would be living in the same city and she’d be seeing a lot more of her kids. She got his visa revoked, presumably thinking it was a sure-fire way to get custody, and it backfired.
Moving to another country is not as dramatic as many Americans imagine. Especially because they’re young, they’ll learn the language very quickly, and probably do fine.
Personally I think they’ll be more likely to resent their mother for getting their father kicked out of the country.
About the money: the father has to pay for a significant amount of her travel.
They were seeing their father though. And is he unable to live or move to Canada? That would have been a much easier arrangement for them to have spent a considerable amount of time with each parent.
Also, I never said that moving to another country was traumatic and it seems they are already bilingual.
My concern is the things they are leaving behind, like their friends, being difficult. Sure they can make new friends. But anyone who has ever moved know the strain it can put on friendships. And at their age maintaining those friendships will be very difficult.
The kids are 3 and 5 years of age. They are too young to have a strong connection to their home, country, school, and friends. Children of that age do not attend school, and they likely have few friends. In reality, once the children grow up, the 3yr. old will have no memory of her life in the US, and the 5 yr old’s memories will be vague.
ITA–to the commentor who said they totally look a like! is it me or dont they look related (kelly and daniel) in above pic?
I heard somewhere that some people are attracted to others that look like themselves.
As far as Halle Berry, i dont know the situation personally with Eric Benet, but I do remember that a) Eric is very close to his daughter and b) he was a sex addict and that’s why they divorced. I dont think Halle could even visit with india without Eric so she chose to distance herself.
reminds me of the whole Jenny mccarthy–Jim Carrey thing. I noticed that when Jenny said it, people were like, why should jim bother–it wasnt his son! well, hello, same thing with halle.
More likely some pap just checked arrival times at the airport. She didn’t leave the US in secret, I remember seeing something about her getting on a plane to France. The ex doesn’t have anything really to gain by calling the paps. But it does make sense that he would be there with the kids and all the balloons etc. just to make it all happy and normal for the kids.
If the mother indeed plays games like this with the ex, imagine what she will do to her kids over time…she sounds a bit manipulative and overbearing, which are not good traits for a mother.