Kelly Rutherford is broke after custody battle: ‘spent every penny fighting for my children’


As you may remember, Gossip Girl’s Kelly Rutherford sort-of lost custody of her two children, son Hermes, 5, and daughter Helena, 3, to her ex husband last September. She didn’t technically lose custody, she was granted 50/50 custody, but the judge ruled that the children should live in Monaco with their father, a German businessman named Daniel Giersch. (Giersch’s parents own a home there are are helping care for the children.) Giersh’s visa to the US was revoked for unknown reasons, although Kelly is thought to have had a hand in it, and the judge ruled that the children should reside with him overseas. Kelly has been travelling to Monaco to visit the children and says they will live with her in the US over the summer. She tells E! News that she’s nearly bankrupt and has been living with a friend after exhausting her savings on legal bills trying to bring the children back to America.

Kelly Rutherford says she is on the “brink of bankruptcy”—and her legal bills are still piling up.

The divorced mother of two, who says she’s living at a friend’s apartment out of necessity, said in an exclusive sit-down with E! News that she has “spent every penny. Every penny from Gossip Girl, my pension, my stocks has been spent fighting for my children.”

Rutherford’s two kids, 6-year-old son Hermes and 3-year-old daughter Helena, live in Monaco with their father, German businessman Daniel Giersch—and their mom, who has joint legal custody, has been exhausting her options to try and get them relocated back to the U.S. A judge ruled last August that they should live primarily with their dad and Giersch no longer has a visa allowing him to reside in the States.

Rutherford compared going to visit her kids in Europe and then coming home without them to “being in a park full of laughing happy children, and then the next day you walk by the park and it’s empty.”

She was pregnant with Helena when she and Giersch started divorce proceedings. “I said, ‘I don’t want any money, I don’t want anything, let’s figure out a great plan for the kids,’” she recalled.

“The relationship was obviously not working.”

“And four years later,” Rutherford said, “this is where I am.”

Giersch’s attorney, meanwhile, told E! News that his client would continue to not comment on the case, in order to protect his children’s privacy. He said last summer, however, that Giersch was “focused on co-parenting.”

Asked how much she has spent on the ongoing custody battle, she replied with a question: “How do you end up in court pregnant, getting ready to get divorced?”

“I went in with very high hopes, I was madly in love,” Rutherford said wistfully. “I’m thankful to him for our beautiful children, but I think I didn’t realize you could litigate against someone like this.”

The really “hurtful part” of the whole thing, she said, is seeing the effect it has on their kids.

“Having to peel my son off my body, screaming, ‘Mama, save me!’ when I had to give him to his father—not because he doesn’t love his dad, but because he’s too young and it was like a forced thing,” Rutherford said.

[From E! Online]

I feel for her, but I also think we’re only hearing one side of the story. Some of you have said that Kelly must have done something to warrant such a harsh ruling, while others have noted that sometimes custody cases turn out unfairly. There was a comment on our earlier story claiming that the judge in this particular custody case was known for outrageous, unfair rulings. Another reader shared a very sad personal story about losing custody when it was not warranted at all.

On the other hand, People Magazine reported that Kelly worked to get her ex’s visa to the US revoked, and the insinuation is that this custody arrangement is due to her own actions. Some reports claim that she worked hard to distance the children from their father, and that she fought to keep his name off the birth certificate for their daughter. (Who was born after they split up in 2009.) Whatever is going on, it’s very sad to hear that she’s separated from her children and has spent millions on legal bills. That seems outrageous.

Kelly with her ex, Daniel Giersch, and their son, Hermes, in 2008

photo credit: Fame/Flynet and WENN.com

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

115 Responses to “Kelly Rutherford is broke after custody battle: ‘spent every penny fighting for my children’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. QueenFreddie says:

    I feel sorry for the kids.

  2. Lilo says:

    Whatever happened there, the kids lost.

  3. DreamyK says:

    I wrote this big long thing about mothers, how hard it is to lose custody, crazy Halle and this b*tch..and then decided she wasn’t worth the effort.

    If she hadn’t been complicit in getting her children’s fathers visa revoked she wouldn’t be broke. No sympathy.

    • littlestar says:

      I was thinking the same thing – and that maybe if she hadn’t gotten his Visa revoked, he would have stayed in the US with the children and they could have all been living close together. But I don’t feel sorry for her, I just feel sorry for her poor children. I couldn’t imagine growing up with two parents at war with one another.

    • Sade says:

      This guy wasnt deported over smoking a joint or a traffic infraction. I am a South African and i can tell you that when i lived in the US i was constantly hearing about rivalries culminating in people try to get others deported. Trust me its not easy. Its not enough to call the authorities and say this guy is an arms dealer, There have to be some major concerns to be deported.
      In this case your government passed it on to my government just before our police commissioner was prosecuted for corruption. My guess is this fell through the cracks, i dont know. I will say again, deportation on basis of criminality isnt so easy. The accusation was credible to authorities and that ought to worry us with regards to the kids.

      In any case, the decision should be based on the kids best interest and not be aimed at purnishing their mum.

      • Sam says:

        Sade, let’s clarify – Giersch was never deported. His Visa was revoked. Two separate concepts. Visa revocation doesn’t mean they come and put you on the plane. If he had stayed once the revocation happened, a deportation proceeding would have taken place. From what I know, Giersch either left voluntarily (which is generally what they do) or was outside the US when it happened (which just means he can’t re-enter). However, he was never, ever deported and the government never attempted to deport him.

      • Sade says:

        I appreciate the correction Sam but as far as my point is concerned this is pure semantics. He is not allowed in states on account of suspicions regarding an offence committed in another jurisdiction. Because he is not allowed in, the judge allowed him to take American kids outside of her physical jurisdiction to France. The judge refused to consider the origin of the visa issue other than that it was kellys lawyer who “sold him out”. This judge has a history of bending backwards for the male parent (testimonials can be googled). I hope you see why your distinction while noted changes nought.

      • DreamyK says:

        He was denied a visa because of visa fraud and failure to pay taxes according to the NYP. I’m assuming the visa fraud was somehow connected to incorrect info on his application or something that came to light during the divorce.

        Kelly probably thought she was being all smart and crafty calling the IRS to try and screw him over so he wouldn’t have funds to travel to the U.S. etc. It backfired.

        Alienation of a parent is a terrible thing for any child/ren to go through. I don’t think the judge was impressed by Kelly’s bank account. I think the Judge saw a negative pattern and moved forward to make sure the child was in an emotionally healthy atmosphere.

        http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/kelly_presses_fight_for_kids_zhuRtY0Y1d2qiJsBjc6mEI

  4. Jacqueline says:

    I just feel for the kids. I can’t imagine being in that position, but I would spend my last penny fighting for my child. But, also, I would never try to keep his from his dad, that’s his dad! That doesn’t express how much you love them it just damages them. I always think of an expression I heard years ago, you have to love your kids more than you hate your ex.

  5. Anne E says:

    Be careful what you wish for … she wished for the ex to lose his US Visa … she got her wish! I only respect the parent who keeps their mouth shut in public and leaves their talking to the judge. That is best for the kids in the long run.

  6. Lulu.T.O. says:

    “Momma save me.”

    Been there done that. My current husband works hard to assure me that I suffer from the separation far more than she does. I wish I could believe that.

    Signed: Victim of OC Court System.

  7. Sade says:

    I have seen a website dedicated to exposing this judge. I am sure anyone interested can google her name. Apparently she is especially biased against mums. Its an usual tilt because its usually fathers who get dissed in custody matters but rather than eliminate the bias she has just swung against the female parent.

    The reason the judge gave was that she thought kelly would poison the kids against their dad. This was based on kelly initially refusing to put his name on the birth certificate. However that had not only been resolved years prior, kelly had afforded him unimpeded access since then. She even flew the kids out tn see him repeatedly after he was deported. Its believed that he was accused of arms trading in south africa. The state department found it credible enough to pass on to SA authorities and deport the guy. But heres the kicker; he wouldnt answer questions on how he makes a living on the grounds that he may incriminate himself. The judge in her ruling said this was of no consequence. She also didnt think that taking the youngest from a mother who was practising attachment parenting was a problem. She didnt think to get him to set up close by in canada or mexico.

    • greyson says:

      I don’t know all the details with this judge, but she has a point about Kelly trying to do parental alienation!

      She wanted to cut him out of her life and have full control of the kids. To that end, she helped to get his visa revoked. Well, it backfired on her.

      I have very little sympathy for her. If you break up, you still have to co-parent with your Ex! Unless he’s abusive, he has a right to be involved in his kid’s life.

      The judge made a controversial call, but the right one. Why should the mother get primary custody on default? Shared custody is how it should be. And I say this as a woman and child of divorce — who actually chose to stay with my mom! (abuse was involved in our case)

      • mercy says:

        Shared custody is always the ideal, but it’s not possible in this case. He’s responsible for his actions that led to his VISA being revoked. The kids shouldn’t be forced to move to a different country, away from their mother, because of that. He could fight to clear his name, mentioning his obligations to his children in his case, but I guess he’s more afraid of incriminating himself.

      • Sade says:

        I dont want to come off as kellys apologist on the allienation charge however she began saying the guy was dodgy during the pregnancy. She said he had threatened to kidnap them and take them to Germany. This was her mindset during the birth cert debacle.

        It seems she hired a private detective and it was he that dug up the arms dealer stuff. Why didnt she know what he did? Lots of wives dont know. The info was then passed on to her lawyer and it was the lawyer who told the state department. Was she ill intended? Probably. Did she do the right thing? Absolutely. Motive in this case is irrelevant. Arms pedalling is not jay walking and ladies if your kids dad is financing his lifestyle by fueling conflicts in foreign countries………you need to tell someone

    • mercy says:

      Arms trading? Didn’t want to incriminate himself? And that didn’t factor in to the ruling? Who’s to say the people he associates with for business or the example he’s leading aren’t poisoning the childrens’ environment?

      I hope the judge is investigated, her rulings like this one overturned, and the arms dealer ex loses physical custody and is made to reimburse all of Kelly’s travel expenses.

      • dagdag says:

        Trading of Arms? Have never heard of this allegation until now.

        Giersch makes his living in the communication business. He is actually known for winning the battle against google.

        And to be denied VISA or revoked is more common that one would like to think.

      • TG says:

        If he is doing arms trading why has no one arrested him? I would even question this website against this judge. Not saying it isn’t legitimate and it may very well be but I don’t trust Kelly not to have started something to get public sympathy. I noticed contradictions in this latest interview. She states that when she was pregnant with her second child all she wanted was to work something out for the kids. Yet, I distinctly remember her giving an interview after one of her custody hearings when the judge forced both of them into joint parenting classes she told the reporter that she didn’t see that she would gain anything from this class and it was a waste of time. So those aren’t the words of someone putting the children first. I don’t know about this guy he may very well be shady but her actions and behavior have shown her to be shady. I think she and Halle are in a close tie for the worst mom of hollywood award. Oh and Kelly practicing attachment parenting was just one more thing she threw out there to try to keep the kids. I remember she got mad at Daniel and ran to the judge becuase he dared to actually potty train their child. In my opinion the kids are better off without this nutter around. Kelly is trying to rewrite history to make her out to be the victim.

        From what I have read it is easy to get a visa revoked. All one has to do is accuse someone and that can warrant a revokation of the visa. I read that she accused him of violence and dealing drugs. From all I have read on custody issues the judge likes to give the kid(s) to the parent who will be the most cooperative with the other. So if you show that you are going to try to alienate the other parent and do bad things to them then you won’t get primary custody even if you might be the better parent in other respects.

        Let’s not forget that Kelly also walked out on her first husband Carlos Tarajano after only 2 months of marriage because he developed a serious heart condition. She was divorced with in 6 months of marriage. He died a few years later. That is a cold hearted woman.

      • Louisa says:

        Why do people keep insisting that an allegation is sufficient to get a visa revoked? My boyfriends estranged wife has been accusing me of everything from smuggling to prostitution for two years and I am still here. I have been interviewed twice and both times they were satisfied that my accuser has a grudge and is loonie. My Romanian friend has also had trouble and she too

      • mercy says:

        @TG, because an arms dealing case against a non-citizen doesn’t fall under U.S. jurisdiction? Because it’s difficult to prove in a court of law when the person in question has been using shell accounts and other financial shenanigans to hide the source of his earnings? Because he won’t talk for fear of incriminating himself?

        It sounds to me like the U.S. government took the easiest route to keep him out of the country, but that doesn’t mean it’s easy to have your VISA revoked based on allegations from a bitter ex-spouse.

        I haven’t heard anything about him offering to pay his back taxes or disputing the charges. He hightailed it to Monaco – a tax haven – and set about taking his children with him. Makes her previous allegations about him threatening to take the kids and move to Germany sound plausible.

    • Dap says:

      Oh come on! This guy is as much an arms dealer as Gabriel Aubry is a racist and violent man

    • KAI says:

      She didnt think to get him to set up close by in canada or mexico.
      ——————————-

      Are you under the impression that an American judge can obtain or order landed immigrant status or a visa or citizenship in Canada or Mexico for a German citizen?

      • Fatuma says:

        The proximity issue is baffling. It seems so extreme to take them to a different continent. Why wasnt he able to get a visa closer to their mother? I am inclined to believe the rumors now.

      • KAI says:

        You have no idea if he applied for a visa to live/work in Canada or Mexico and if he didn’t that’s his choice. He is from Germany and chooses to live in Monaco near his parents and they help with the children. If he can’t get a visa to live and work in the US maybe she should move to Europe to be closer to her children.

    • Ok says:

      Wow Sade. You sure have a lot of background on this situation.

      Do you also have background on the situation of Kelly’s first marriage?? There were no children from that union. But 5 weeks into the marriage, Kelly’s hot, young stockbroker husband suffered a massive debilitating heart attack in the shower.

      Kelly left him about 4 weeks later. I guess being married to an invalid that needed care did not appeal to her.

      He died about 3 years later due to the heart defect. His parents cared for him while he was sick and dying. Because his lovely wife decided that the “in sickness” part of the wedding vows really did not apply to her.

      It has an ironic feel to it. Because she strikes me as being the one with the defective heart.

      Every story I read about Kelly Rutherford, I wonder what type of shrew she must really be.

      • dazzle says:

        OK

        You wouldnt be suggesting that because you dont approve of a womans choices we should rip her children from her? Because I’m pretty sure the Puritans did this too and I believe we all agree that was barberic. No court should give an ish about anything other than whats best for the children, shame on that judge!

  8. LIVEALOT says:

    sorry but her ex looks like he could be her son in that pic. O_0

  9. Sachi says:

    From the stories about her getting her ex deported, she doesn’t sound like a nice person.

    Was it ever proven that her ex was involved in some crime ring? I remember there were stories that he has a shady profile in the US.

    But Kelly didn’t even want him there when she gave birth to their son and refused to put his name on the birth certificate. If the guy wanted to be there for his kids, why did she deny that?

  10. karmasabiatch! says:

    CB, is her case up for appeal again?

    I guess the better question is, how can she continue to wage legal battle for her children if the money’s all gone, right? No matter how some of you may feel about her, she’s clearly devoted to seeing her children if she’s bankrupted herself in the service of doing so.

    Having your babies ripped out of your arms and sent to live in a foreign land…I just can’t. I truly hope this case is rectified.

  11. Ellie66 says:

    Wow that sucks! I couldn’t imagine not have my son with me (dad lives close by) that judge needs to be invistagated, the ex seems a little shady. I agree we don’t know the whole story but it just seems so harsh on her.

  12. mercy says:

    Why was his VISA revoked? There has to have been a reason besides she didn’t want him to have custody. If he’s guilty of doing something that caused him to lose his VISA, that’s on him.

    I assume the kids were living with her in the U.S. from birth. That arrangement should not have been disrupted, unless there was proof she wasn’t a fit parent (which I assume there wasn’t as she still has 50% custody.) What if she couldn’t afford the regular trips to France? What if she had to work and didn’t have enough time off to go?

    • Sam says:

      From what is known, his visa was revoked after Kelly made allegations that he was involved in arms dealing and other unsavory activities overseas. Since 9/11 and under the Patriot Act, it is now far easier to get a visa revoked than before. Now, the mere allegation of stuff like that can get your visa revoked and you can be sent back. It’s a lower bar. The judge probably picked this ruling because she figured that since Kelly’s allegations were the reason why the visa was revoked (thus the reason why her ex can’t leave Europe), she should have the burden to travel and visit the kids there. I have no idea whether the allegations had any validity (although no country has ever tried to take any action against him), but she played a part in the revocation.

      • Marshal says:

        @Sam The notion that visas are revoked on bare accusations after the Patriot Act is totally incorrect. Alot of manpower goes into verifying information. Its a lower standard than would be required by a court but its certainly more than just an accusation. Lol. Case in point: the older Boston bomber brother, who wasnt a citizen. This guy was fingered by Russian intelligence years ago. By your theory he would have been repartriated instantly right? Or maybe Kelly Rutherford has more clout than the BGV?

      • Louisa says:

        Yeah, hadnt thought of that. A system didnt deport the bomber after a foreign government made such a serious allegation, wouldnt care about an ex wifes tales UNLESS they had proof.

  13. Sade says:

    Sorry i am on a rant here but this case upsets me.

    Anyway, this judge didnt think that if you are going to do something so traumatising atleast minimise the impact by insisting he not take them somewhere they have to learn a new language. So to surmarise you have a man who wont state what he does, taking kids away from the primary care giver, to a place they have never been to, knowing full well that their mother has to be in another country to make a living and knowing that in making this order you have sent them out of your physical jurisdiction. The instant those kids get French citizenship Kelly is sank.

    FYI the judge was transferred recently and in her discretion has chosen to take her more controversial cases, including this one. If you are gonna screw with people, you may as well do it to the very end,

    • greyson says:

      “atleast minimise the impact by insisting he not take them somewhere they have to learn a new language.”

      Her Ex is German — not American. Most bi-cultural kids learn more than one language.

      • Sade says:

        He took them to France not Germany. I am trilingual and understand about 5 dialects but i still wovldnt do this to children coping with so much craziness! There was enough on their plate without adding culture/language shock. Poor babies!

      • mercy says:

        The language isn’t a problem, but the distance is. They married and lived in the States. Their kids were born there and apparently living there most of the time there until this decision. I see a lot of speculation about Kelly’s fitness as a parent, but she retained 50% custodial rights. One could easily speculate about his associations. He lost his VISA. I don’t believe the U.S. government is in the habit of revoking VISA’s of western businessmen who were married to U.S. citizens and have children who were born and living there.

  14. Sam says:

    She sounds like she’s softened her tone on her ex dramatically since the last interviews she did. She accused him of some pretty serious stuff for a while. Now, she makes it sound like it was an amicable split and that she wants him in the kids’ lives. I wonder if this is because they have an appeal coming up or because she didn’t get a great public response before when she was more hardline about the whole situation.

    • Ok says:

      Sam — good memory on you. From the interviews I remember reading, she was not taking the “lets work out something great for the kids” attitude

      Maybe the judge gave him the kids because he isn’t exactly working a lot like she was and continues to work.

      In her industry there are crazy work schedules

    • dazzle says:

      What do you mean? This story had alot of mainstream coverage, all very favourable to her side. I have just seen an ABC piece with constitutional lawyer Allan Dershowitz saying this is a rights issue and that she should appeal.

      If you are going by comment sections let me just point out how unreliable an indicator those are. If you thought those were accurate Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Rihanna, Kanye, Chris Brown wouldnt be so successful. The best indicator of public mood is, strangely, the tone adopted by mainstream media.

  15. Dibba says:

    Feel bad for her and kids. She shouldn’t have rushed into things with this guy and then got pregnant again after she knew things were bad.

  16. Onyx XV says:

    Marriage counseling probably would have cost a lot less. Just sayin…

  17. OK says:

    I don’t understand how she could have so much power to have him deported.

  18. lucy2 says:

    It’s a sad situation for the kids. I definitely think we’re only hearing one side though, but whatever the case, those kids are put in the middle and under a lot of stress.
    I wonder if she can move to Monaco to be near them.

  19. Relli says:

    Those poor poor babies, what a confusing and awful thing to go through so young and not be able to fully comprehend what the $%&^ is going on.

  20. evyn says:

    1) Karma is a bitch.
    2) It’s her fault her ex had to leave the country & his job, making her the richer parent.
    3) I think she is just crying broke to even the playing field.
    4)Did she ever consider moving to be closer to her kids?

    • mercy says:

      1) Tell that to all the good people who have had bad things happen to them. Not saying Kelly is one of them, but the kids didn’t do anything to deserve this.

      2) Any actions she may have taken don’t absolve him of his responsibility. He apparently didn’t care enough to obey the laws or try to make amends to clear his name and try to get his VISA re-instated.

      3) Presumably the courts will have a look at her finances. She has not been found to have several shell accounts to avoid reporting her earnings.

      4) Presumably her primary source of income comes from working in the U.S. Does France even allow U.S. citizens to establish a full-time residence and work there?

  21. mslewis says:

    This woman accused her children’s father of being a “drug kingpin” and caused his visa to be revoked. She knew that with the Patriot Act in the U.S., just an accusation of wrongdoing made of a foreign national would cause trouble for that person. She did it on purpose with no proof. (Proof is not necessary, just the accusation.) This has come back to haunt her but she apparently refuses to believe it is her fault. She can blame the courts all she wants but all of this is her fault. She made her bed, now she can lay down in it. Her ex-husband has suffered because of her and now her children are suffering. She needs to look inside herself and stop whining to the media.

    • Ok says:

      Mercy — she may have not been able to GET a penny from him because she likely was the breadwinner.

    • Ok says:

      Mslewis –here here. I support your comment. I think she tried a tactical power move to get him out of the picture permanently. And it backfired. Big time.

      Did you notice how when she was asked how much she had spent on lawyers, she deflected the question and brought up the difficulty of being pregnant and filing for divorce??

      Big red waving flag when someone deflects questions and then steers back to the pity party. Big. Red. Flag.

      • Lisa says:

        @ok Kelly may have taken the advice of her attorney not knowing the outcome. You may not agree, but attorney’s often suggest actions to their client that potentially could have a negative impact on her custody issues. I agree that the judge may have punished her for her obvious negligence but it must really hurt her that she does not have reasonable custody with her children. Kelly may have done things to make this situation worse… But that does not mean she is a bad mother.

  22. Inco says:

    I think Kelly has a pattern of negative and unstable behavior, and many people tend to overlook it because she’s pushing this image of a victimized mother fighting for her children. Yes, it’s sad it has come to this, but it’s her own doing. The kids are living safely and very comfortably with their family (on their dad’s side, but just as much their own blood, as their mother’s side). Kelly should stop blabbing about her ex-husband and stop selling her children’s privacy, and get some therapy instead. In this case, it seems the children’s best interests took precedence, and she’s bitter because what’s best for the kids turned out not to be the best for her.

  23. Melissa says:

    I just don’t trust this person – at all. Not saying the father is a saint – he probably is involved in some shady business practices. But it sounds to me like she tried to alienate the kids from their father and try and make sure she had sole access to them, which is an awful thing to do to the kids she professes to love so much.

    Maybe she should befriend Melissa Etheridge’s ex and they can talk about how broke they are, because people in real world who manage to make it on less than $500K a year don’t wanna hear it!

    Side note: what is the dress doing to her boobs and her hip where the bow is?

  24. Talie says:

    I feel for her, but from what I’ve read, she’s also made some bad mistakes that ultimately put her in this position. Even if you hate the other person, being amicable is always the way to go.

  25. Maddie says:

    Didn’t she divorce her first husband when he fell ill (heart problems I think)

    Plus just because your a mother doesn’t make you a fit parent to raise your kids and get them automatically, fathers have rights to.

    Not only didn’t she obey the courts orders to place h name on the birth certificate, she went against visitation orders and not letting their father access to his kids.

    She did everything to keep the kids from their dad and that is why she gave the husband full custody because he would let her see them without the hassel.

    I just read a post from a father who’s ex cheated on him, lead him on about wanting to get back together only to marry the other man.

    He got through it dated other woman met his now soon to be wife…..

    His exwife is now going for full custody because she she claims she doesn’t like the fact that the soon to be has kids.

  26. Barbara says:

    I followed this sad tale from when she would not let him be at their sons birth or put his name on the daughters birth certificate. All I can say is that KARMA came to roost on her shoulder.

  27. Dap says:

    She played and lost – big time. Now it’s time to suck it up. Apologize to her ex-husband. Tell the judge she learned the lesson and do whatever she needs to do to assure these two persons that she is ready to co-parent peacefully with the father.
    Also, Monaco is a sunny, safe and international place on the Mediteranean shore. The children have their grandparents and school friends there. She’s been flying to be with them very often. The kids can’t be that unhappy (unless both parents are trash talking each other in front of them – which is always a sad possibility)

  28. manda says:

    I don’t usually get judgey on ciggies, but she apparently is smoking one WHILE holding the child, effectively smoking right in the kid’s face, in that last pic! If I was a star, and had kids, I would totally take my smoking underground.

  29. lucy says:

    I hope she gets work so she can earn a living.

  30. The Original Mia says:

    No sympathy. She gambled and lost big time. She refused to work with the detailed parenting plan established by the judge. She was warned and she continued to make things difficult for her ex to parent the kids. She thought she had the upper hand by alleging he was an arms dealer, and although nothing was proven, it was enough to get his Visa revoked. The judge took all of that into account and Kelly lost. I have no sympathy for her. None. This is the true definition of karma. All her crappy behavior has come home to roost.

    “Mama save me!” Really Kelly? This is why you won’t be getting those kids back any time soon.

  31. NerdMomma says:

    Instead of spending every last penny on lawyers, she should have spent her money moving to Monaco. And getting whatever education necessary to be able to get a job in Monaco. Would have been money far better spent.

  32. emma says:

    This is really a very odd story. I mean, yea it’s terrible for a mother to have her children out of the country.. but as you say, she has 50/50 custody and they’re spending the summer with her… So, I don’t know. She wouldn’t see them any more if they lived a couple states away or in another country.
    They’re probably both crazy.

  33. Tatiana says:

    I believe children should have access to both parents. I also believe that its difficult for a mother to lose custody of her children.

    Most judges rule on joint custody for the children with one parent being the primary custodial parent.

    I am a divorced mother of two. My ex rarely followed anything in our divorce decree. I tried to work things out with him instead of running to court for every little thing. I even lowered child support to help my ex when he lost his job. He remarried had another child and eventually stopped paying child support. I lived in Arizona at the time where you cannot deny visitation due to non payment. I evenually took my ex to court – to make a long story short he was incarcerated 6 times once for 9 months another time he was in “tent city” and yet he still wouldn’t pay. I believe child support is an honor system. In spite of all of this I never said a bad thing about him in front of the children.

    Today my daughter are 25 and 30 each with college degrees. Their father still owes 30K in back child support and at last is paying which I give to them. They know what a deadbeat he is – they figured this out themselves.

    Fighting with courts and lawyers only hurts the children. Notice how Kelly’s son is pushing her away while she’s holding a cigarette in the last picture. Perhaps she’s the one who cries and carries on when the kids part. I agree we’re only hearing one side of this story.

  34. Poppies1 says:

    Personally, I think there is much more to this than she is putting out there. It is HIGHLY unusual for the father to have primary physical custody given the children’s very young ages. Courts tend to feel very young children should be with the mother (unless there is evidence to the contrary).

  35. Mirna says:

    Karma seems to have bitten her on the a$$, as she thought she could pull a Halle Berry and conveniently get rid of the father once he sired the children. That being said, though, I cannot imagine the judge’s ruling holding up on appeal – she basically sent American children into a foreign jurisdiction. She doesn’t have the authority to do that. As someone in the legal field, I can’t wait to see how this ultimately turns out.

  36. TG says:

    @Louisa – It depends on who you complain to. If an ex just complains to a judge to try to get someone deported nothing will likely happen becuase the judge knows why you are making the allegation, but it you go the proper channels you can have a more successful chance of getting someone looked into which could result in them getting their visa revoked. Everyone thinks just because of their experience that that is the case for everyone. I know that isn’t true because I know many immigrants both legal and illegal and you would not believe how some people get away with all kinds of fraud and others don’t. It is a case by case basis. As someone said above the Boston Marathon bomber didn’t lose his permanent residence status because he was being questioned by the FBI when he probably should have been deported but others get deported for the slightest infraction or don’t get their visas.

    Also, to my knowledge the ex husband has never been charged with any of these crimes so it doesn’t seem like he was up to anything. I don’t like Kelly and I don’t know or even care about the ex but her behavior in the past and even her wining in these recent interviews does not get my sympathy.

  37. ms. deneuve says:

    I am just outraged and disgusted how many people are cheering a decision where two young children are forced to grow up without their mother actively involved in their day-to-day lives ripped from the lives and friends and schools they are accustomed to and planted somewhere across the ocean with Papa who lives with his mama in his stepfather’s house who doesn’t even have a steady job and doesn’t want to answer questions. there is no doubt that these kids will have to overcome some serious emotional hurdles and I pray that they don’t come out all f… up.

    • Maddie says:

      Why does a mother automatically get the children in a divorce case like fathers are a by product that doesn’t matter in the the child’s life?

      This woman tried to dismiss the father from her kids lives period, she doesn’t have the right to dictate to him when he gets to see his kids.

      There are way too many deadbeat dads out thereor Disney dads who pay and play yet here we have a dad who wants to be in his kids lives and you negate all the evidence that the courts have because she a female and a mother.

  38. Maddie says:

    May I add that everything your claiming the judge did is what the mother was doing to the dad, the anonymous tip to get his visa revoked she would have never let the go sighting that he would disappear into Europe nether regions never to be seen again is what her next claim would have been to keep him from the kids.

    She should have went with a sperm bank.

  39. Amy says:

    These two are both sketchy. How did the ex end up with both kids in Monaco? Did the judge let him do that or did he just up and take the kids with him, knowing he wouldn’t be allowed to enter the States to see them on a revoked visa?

    And once that happened, Kelly had no choice but to fly back and forth NY-Monaco to see her children. I know people have said she ratted her ex out for some kind of fraudulent behavior which got his visa revoked. So that’s her own fault for taking away her ex’s freedom to come and go to the States.

    In any case, they both suck. The father for knowingly taking away the children from the mother and the mother for getting the father’s legal status messed up. What a complicated case!

  40. TG says:

    My brother tried to pull a stunt like that. He had a child with a woman from another country and when they had a bitter custody fight he tried to pull the she is illegal card and the judge shut him down quick. The judge told him that she was good enough to be with and have kids with so you can’t try and get her deported now. I think she had overstayed a visa. But anyway his history is long and twisted. She ended up getting a protective status visa for abuse victims and I think is now happily married to a decent man.

  41. Felicia says:

    She should have gone to a sperm donor.

    I don’t think the judge’s ruling was in the best interest of the children and that’s what it comes down to for me.
    1. They kids were born and raised in the US.
    2. They’re both very young.
    3. Kelly has been the primary, day to day parent in their lives to this point.
    4. I know there’s some question whether she’s responsible for him losing his VISA but the fact is she was making an effort for the kids to see him. There are numerous pictures of her visiting Jamaica and other places with the children so they could have their father in their lives. So no, it’s not an instance where the ONLY way the kids could see the dad was by ripping them away from the mother and setting up a home in a another country where they’d need to learn a new language.
    5. Her behavior during her prior marriage may be deplorable but it’s irrelevant. She may be a horrible wife but no one is alleging she’s a bad mother.

    I think the judge basically punished her and her kids because Kelly didn’t do the things the judge ordered like put the father’s name on the birth certificate. (Kelly hemmed and hawed over that for a long time before giving in.) She’s being used as an example and the kids are paying for it.

    I think it annoys people that Kelly is painting herself as an innocent when she’s clearly done things to put herself in this position like ignoring the judge’s directives, possibly sending in the tip about her ex, etc. But it’s just not in the kid’s best interest to force them into this situation, especially when Kelly WAS making an effort for the kids to see the dad.

  42. Lola says:

    If you have children with someone, you are stuck with them. So give it up, play nice, and co-parent.

    Signed, divorce lawyer.

  43. Sara says:

    This situation is bizarre. Was this custody case decided in the US or abroad? if abroad, she should bring the kids for a visit in the US and never return them.

  44. The Original Victoria says:

    I love how everyone is so much nicer about Kelly doing allegedly the same thing that Halle allegedly did to Saint Aubry.

    Where is the cray cray bitchy comments?

    Where is the shade?

    Why are people disagreeing with her so cordially but have all this shade toward Halle?

    I’ll wait.