These are some assorted photos from the beginning of Paris Fashion Week, which began a few days ago. The turnout for these shows is always less than enthusiastic, especially if we’re comparing them to the turnout for the September Fashion Weeks. I always think that the only people who show up to fashion shows in January and February are A) top-tier celebrities and stylists looking for something spectacular for the Oscars and the BAFTAs and B) famewhores who can’t get attention in September. With that in mind, let’s discuss these photos!

I’m starting with Salma Hayek and her husband Francois-Henri Pinault at the Yves Saint Laurent show on Sunday. Pinault owns (or co-owns) so many of the huge, major, important labels that show during Paris Fashion Week, and while it’s clear that Salma enjoys being a part of that world, I do wonder if a little bit goes a long way, you know? She must be exhausted with this crap by now. But she would never admit it because trophy wives don’t admit that they’re bored.

Dita Von Teese at the Alexis Mabille Spring/Summer 2013 Haute-Couture show – perfection.

Jessica Alba at Dior – she looks great, doesn’t she? For the most part, I think red lips are overdone and red doesn’t suit every woman. But this is a great example of a red lip working.

Noomi Rapace at Dior – she’s all over Paris Fashion Week, this is like the third show she’s been to in two days. I’m not crazy about her dress, but her face is lovely. PS… LOOK AT THAT RING.

Rosamund Pike in a gorgeous grey tweed. I WANT THIS COAT.

Olivia Munn at the Versace show. I don’t get it…? Is she trying to be a “fashion girl” now?

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Here are some new photos of Salma Hayek at the Balenciaga show in Paris today – the same show that an unwashed-dishrag-looking Kristen Stewart attended. Salma was there with her billionaire husband Francois-Henri Pinault, who is the CEO of PPR, which is the firm that owns Balenciaga. I might have missed a few steps in there, but basically Pinault owns this sh-t and my point remains the same: Salma Hayek could and should be wearing much better clothes. WTF is this outfit? She looks like someone made her a peplum out of a trash bag. And look at that skirt from behind – so, so unflattering. Ridiculous.

Meanwhile, I have a few more quotes from that stupid More Magazine Canada interview that Salma did. We’ve had quotes from this piece all week – I don’t get why these quotes are being released in this slow drip-drip of Goopiness, but here are the latest (I’m including some of ones we’ve already covered for context):

Salma says she’s as ‘the limit of chubbiness at all times’, adding: ‘I’m not a skinny girl. Everybody has a weakness — mine is food’, she insisted: ‘If you love food and you love red wine and they put you in France, you’re in a good place and you’re in a bad place at the same time.’

This is particularly bad news for Salma as she is married to French billionaire Francois-Henri Pinault, 50, with whom she has a four-year-old daughter called Valentina.

To allow herself to indulge guilt-free, Salma said she steps on the scale daily, adding: ‘You have to weigh yourself every day, and you have to have an alarm number. When you get to that number, you have to start putting it in reverse.’

The star said she says she keeps her figure in check by dieting more so than exercise, confessing: ‘I don’t have stamina in exercise . . . but I have it in life.’

And after being married for three years, Salma revealed that she and her husband — the French CEO of luxury-brands firm PPR, which handles Gucci and Balenciaga — keeps her motivated to keep an eye on the scale.

She said: ‘I think if I was not in love, I would probably let myself go faster. Love gives me the vanity to continue. I’m not necessarily vain, but when I gained 50-something pounds in the pregnancy, it did something to me. Since then, at least I make an effort.’

[From The Mail]

So, she’s basically saying that she only keeps herself in shape for her husband, and her marriage makes her (more) vain.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

I’m waiting on TMZ to report what went down yesterday in Halle Berry’s custody hearing requesting a move to France. I’m assuming that no decision was made yet, judging by TMZ’s lack of updates on the case. Oddly, Salma Hayek has issued a declaration on Halle’s behalf in which she compared the paparazzi situation in LA to France, since Halle is basing her argument on a need to escape paparazzi. It seems like a cheap stunt to bring in another big name, but Halle is getting out the big guns in an attempt to get her way. Let’s hope it backfires.

Halle, her fiance Oliver Martinez and Salma and her husband, Francois-Henri Pinault, were seen on a double dinner date Wednesday night at the Little Door in West Hollywood. (Those are the photos here.) They were there to celebrate Halle’s 46th birthday. I don’t remember hearing that these two were friends, but I found a story that they hung out in Paris together in 2010, so I guess this isn’t just a case of Halle calling on Salma to bolster her case to move to France. I mean, that’s what she’s doing but they do seem to be friends.

Meanwhile The National Enquirer has an interesting story this week about Halle’s beef with Robert Downey Jr. after an accident she sustained on the set of their 2003 horror film, Gothica. (Did any of you see that movie and was it as bad as I’ve heard? I have a low tolerance for scary movies.) Apparently, RDJ broke Halle’s arm by mistake while they were filming a scene and Halle still hasn’t forgiven him.

Halle Berry accidentally got bopped in the head during a fight scene for her new flick “The Hive” in July, which triggered a years-old memory – and reignited her long-held, raging fury at Robert Downey Jr. for twisting her arm and breaking it on the “Gothika” set back in 2003. “Halle still hates Robert,” said a source close to the star. “She didn’t think he was sorry enough. He didn’t even send flowers. Whenever she seems him in town, she won’t talk to him!”

Halle, who lost weeks of work after the injury, recalled: “It wasn’t like I was trying to fall 50 feet and just fell wrong, or did something crazy. I was doing a scene with Robert and he grabbed my arm the wrong way and broke it…” [Robert said] “It was an accident. I’m sorry if she’s still upset. I did everything I had to do to keep my side of the street clean. I wish her the best.”

[From The National Enquirer, print edition, Mike Walker's column]

It sounds like these two did not get along at all. You can draw your own conclusions about whether it’s Halle or RDJ’s fault, and maybe it was a mutual issue. I’m trying to be diplomatic here. I mean Halle’s arm did get broken, but it sounds like she’s holding onto a serious grudge.

How drunk does Salma look here? At least she wasn’t driving. Also, doesn’t it look like Francois-Henri just came from the gym? Photo credit: Pacific Coast News

Salma Hayek is the cover girl for the July issue of InStyle Magazine, all to promote her supporting part in Oliver Stone’s Savages – that film with Blake Lively, Aaron Johnson, Taylor Kitsch and Benicio del Toro. Salma plays the matriarch of the Mexican drug cartel trying to get into the California drug market. Something like that. But the real Salma isn’t so dark – her InStyle interview is all about how happy she is and how she loves being a mom, etc, etc. Some highlights:

A Valentina story: “This morning I was feeling jet-lagged. I was still in bed when I heard somebody run into the room. Valentina jumped on my bed and hugged me, and I go, ‘What are you doing? You scared me!’ She started giggling and said to me, ‘You desperately needed my energy.’ I was so surprised she said that. A 4-year-old! And she’s holding me, and it’s so beautiful—and she was so right!”

Valentina is a good traveler: “We’re lucky because she loves traveling. For her it’s second nature. If I put her in a school in Spain because I’m doing a movie there, she’s excited about this new experience with other kids and the teachers. And when she leaves, she does so with no sorrow. She remembers them and talks about them and loves them, but she doesn’t have the anxiety or sadness — none of that.”

Salma says she enjoys decompressing in the evenings by reading things like Dr. Seuss books to Valentina: “My daughter comes up with her own songs and rhymes as well,” notes Hayek. “She always makes me laugh.”

On maintaining balance: “I have created a very happy, healthy environment. When a job is over, I go home to my life.”

On her husband: “He’s very romantic, and so am I. What’s really romantic are the moments that are unexpected. You can fly somewhere overnight to make [being together] ‘important,’ but it’s the little things of everyday life that count.”

[Via Celebrity Gossip & People Magazine]

In the wake of Francois-Henri Pinault’s child support trial for his son Augustin, whom he fathered with Linda Evangelista, I’ve come to wonder what Pinault is really like behind the scenes. Before the trial and all of the dirty little secrets than Linda’s lawyers aired, the only stuff I really knew about Pinault was whatever Salma said about him in interviews. In her mind, he’s romantic and passionate and he adores her completely. But to Linda, he was cold and distant and a total bastard. Does Salma simply bring out the best in him? Or is he really a cold bastard and Salma is just talking him up because… why not? He’s rich.

Here are some photos of Salma and Valentina on the Massachusetts set of The Grownups 2. Salma is playing an aerobics instructor. I love Valentina’s dress.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, InStyle Mag and Just Jared.

I want Linda Evangelista is send me a thank you note. Wouldn’t that be great? I think I deserve some credit, y’all. Over the course of just three days and only two days of child support testimony, I changed my tune. When we first started covering the child support case – where Linda Evangelista was suing Francois-Henri Pinault (husband of Salma Hayek) for $46,000 a month in child support for their son Augie – I didn’t come down on any side. But on Sunday, I wrote about the case again, and I ended up coming down on Team Evangelista, simply because Pinault was coming across like such a cheap-ass d-bag. And maybe my voice was one of many in the changing tide against Pinault. Maybe Pinault and his lawyers finally realized how his testimony sounded so out-of-touch and smarmy. Because now Enavgelista and Pinault have come to some kind of agreement. Linda probably isn’t getting $46,000 but rest assured, Pinault will be paying:

Supermodel Linda Evangelista reached a settlement today in her bitterly-contested child support battle with her billionaire French baby-daddy, Francois-Henri Pinault — then came to court wearing a sunny smile and a chiffon dress fit for a garden party.

“He has gone a long way toward meeting those original demands,” a source close to the negotiation said of Pinault, who had been on the hook for a potential $46,000 a month that Evangelista said she needed for the nannies, chauffeurs, bodyguards and other expenses of Augustin, the five-year-old son conceived during their whirlwind 2005 affair.

Pinault, 49, is the CEO of the Paris-based luxury conglomerate that owns Gucci and Yves St. Laurent. He is raising a four-year-old daughter, Valentina, with his glamorous wife, movie star Salma Hayek, who he met four months after ditching Evangelista in January, 2006 — right after learning the cat walker was pregnant.

In previous court hearings, Evangelista’s lawyer has complained that while Pinault lavishes wealth on Valentina, he paid virtually nothing to support Augie prior to a temporary court order last year.

Today’s surprise settlement — presumed to be snugly in the five-figures per month — was reached by telephone this morning, the source said, declining to give an exact figure.

The settlement came as an international press corps descended on the courthouse to cover Evangelista’s second day of testimony in the highly-publicized case. Evangelista’s testimony, now no longer necessary, would have touched on such sensitive topics as whether Pinault initial preference was that the baby be aborted — something Evangelista was set to aver, and which Pinault has denied through a spokesman.

Evangelista’s “abortion” testimony would have dealt a public relations blow to the wealthy female clientele of Pinault, whose company also owns the luxury brands Bottega Veneta and Boucheron. Had she taken the stand today, Evangelista, 46, was also due to detail how Pinault had asked for a DNA test prior to acknowledging paternity — another less-than-sympathetic revelation for the ladies who shop.

“The parties have reached an agreement in principal, which we will present to your honor tomorrow,” Evangelista lawyer William Beslow told the support magistrate in today’s brief proceeding, which was attended by both Evangelista and Pinault.

“I agree with what Mr. Beslow says and join in the agreement,” added Pinault’s lawyer, David Aronson.

The cat walker wore a summery, floral-print dress of pleated chiffon, and chatted almost warmly with her old flame as they left the courtroom, shoulders brushing. In a previous hearing last year, she had presented Pinault with a list of little “Augie’s” expenses totaling more than $46,000 a month — a figure that included $15-16,000 a month for gun-toting, ex-NYPD detective chauffeurs, plus a 24-hour nanny costing almost $7,000 a month.

“I say this with Mr. Beslow beside me — everybody’s glad,” Aronson told reporters afterward. “For the sake of the child,” he added.

The lawyers — though not Pinault and Evangelista — will return to court tomorrow as a formality, to show the magistrate the paperwork for their settlement. It is not likely that the dollar amounts or any other details will be put on the court record, Aronson said.

Just how well Evangelista and Augie made out remains a mystery. But another source who was informed of the negotiations insisted that the final number “Is not close to the original demands,” meaning not near the $46,000 number initially bandied about.

[From The New York Post]

If I’m reading between the lines correctly, Pinault cried uncle and Linda made just enough concessions to make Pinault feel like a big man. My guess at the money situation? Probably a trust in Augie’s name worth a few million, and Augie will come into it when he’s 18 years old. Plus, maybe $30,000 a month for Linda. That’s just my guess!

Here’s an honest question, and I’m not asking this to be anti-French at all, this is seriously a theory I have: do you think Pinault was taken aback by the lack of respect he got in New York? He’s a major figure in France, and had this child support case played out in the French courts, I think the result would be very, very different. I think Pinault came into this case thinking that with his money, his public persona and his lawyers, he could push Evangelista around and wage a PR campaign to make her look like a money-hungry shrew. He totally didn’t understand how some Americans would find Evangelista sympathetic, and even more than that, they would find him, Pinault, to be rather vile. Was this all just a massive PR miscalculation?

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

Friday’s story about Linda Evangelista’s child support case was a doozy, and it’s just going to get more intense with more testimony coming on Monday and Tuesday. From what I’ve read, it seems like the whole “Billionaire Francois-Henri Pinault asked Linda Evangelista to get an abortion” thing happened on the first day of court. On the second day of the court case, Pinault and Evangelista both gave testimony about who said what and when. Pinault even spoke about (his now-wife) Salma Hayek’s pregnancy with Valentina, and how they thought for months that (still-in-utero) Valentina may have Down’s Syndrome. Oh, and Pinault’s lawyers claim that they had approached Linda with offers of child support, and SHE was the one who gave them the silent treatment, which is a direct contradiction of Linda’s earlier claims (and the reason for the this whole child support case). Here’s more:

Her first job ever — picking cherries at age 12, on a farm in Ontario — got her $10 a day. Her first modeling job — for a hometown newspaper ad — paid just $8 an hour. Supermodel Linda Evangelista took the witness stand yesterday in her contentious court battle with billionaire French baby daddy Francois-Henri Pinault, describing her cash-strapped beginnings as a prelude to the big- money child-support pitch she’ll make Monday.

“Fifty cents a basket,” Evangelista said when asked what the pay was for that first job 35 years ago. This from a woman who once declared that supermodels don’t get out of bed for less than $10,000.

Evangelista continues to command $100,000 for the occasional runway appearance, the still-glamorous catwalker testified. She also spends more than $46,000 per month, she says, on Augustin, her 5-year-old son by Pinault, the CEO of the Paris-based luxury conglomerate that owns Gucci and Yves Saint Laurent.

Pinault would meet, impregnate and marry actress Salma Hayek within a year of fathering “Augie” — and has been less than a model dad, Evangelista’s lawyer has contended. The model and the mogul had been together only seven days when Evangelista announced her pregnancy. Pinault suggested she abort the baby, she says — though Pinault denies that. He promptly dumped her, not conceding paternity until it was confirmed by a DNA test a full year after Augie’s birth.

“My wife was pregnant,” Pinault explained of his decision to put baby Augie on a shelf that first year. “For five months, we were told the baby [had] Down syndrome,” he said of Valentina, his daughter by Hayek. “I [asked] Linda to postpone my recognition [of Augie] until after the birth of Valentina. It was very complicated situation. My wife almost lost the baby.”

Pinault — who is worth some $3 billion and makes up to $5 million a year — paid not a single euro until last year, when a Manhattan magistrate set a temporary support amount, according to testimony. His lawyers are accusing the supermodel of cherry-picking facts.

Pinault testified yesterday that his lawyers repeatedly broached the topic of support with Evangelista’s lawyers — and were met with silence. He spent $260,000 on “gifts” in 2010, Pinault told Support Magistrate Paul Ryneski matter of factly under questioning by Evangelista lawyer William Beslow. Pinault admitted that most of that money was for gifts for himself.

“I have a watch collection,” he said. “It’s for when I buy a watch for me.”

Did he recall buying any gifts at all for Augie in 2010, he was asked.

“I bought him a present for his birthday and for Christmas,” he answered.

Augie turned 4 in October of that year. What was the birthday present? Beslow asked.

“I don’t remember,” Pinault said.

And what was the Christmas gift?

“It was . . . FAO Schwarz,” he fumbled. “I bought it online. It was a piano thing.”

[From Page Six]

I said on Friday that I wasn’t really crazy about Linda or Francois-Henri. They both seemed kind of awful to me, but at this point, I’m definitely leaning more towards Linda. Sure, I still think the $46,000-a-month figure is kind of crazy, but as far as Linda’s side of the story… yeah, I think she’s the one telling the truth, or a more truthful version of what went down. Pinault made it seem like he acknowledged paternity of Augie very quickly when it’s clear he was shining Linda on, dragging it out for a long time until Linda forced the issue. I think Pinault fell in love with Salma and simply didn’t want to have to deal with all of the issues with Linda and Augie – and thus, he ended up treating Linda and Augie like crap. I also think Pinault’s lawyers are probably full of it as far as the “we offered her support years ago” thing – that version simply doesn’t make sense.

As for Pinault and his “gifts” to himself… yeah. That looks really bad, especially when he can’t remember what he gave his son!

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet and Pacific Coast News.

Last summer, I was genuinely surprised to learn that the father of Linda Evangelista’s son Augustin was none other than Salma Hayek’s husband, Francois-Henri Pinault. Pinault fathered Augustin before he and Salma met and married (although the timeline seems wonky to me). Linda kept the paternity under wraps for several years, but then she sued for child support and now the whole thing is being worked out in a New York City courthouse. Linda is still asking for $46,000 A MONTH in child support, which Pinault is fighting tooth and nail. I’m including photos of Linda in court yesterday, and a photo of Salma and Pinault at a Lakers game a few weeks ago. Linda and her lawyers have officially “taken the gloves off” in the legal proceedings – you can read the NY Post’s extensive coverage here, and I’m including some of the juiciest parts below. Linda’s lawyer says that Pinault asked Linda to get an abortion.

Linda Evangelista’s billionaire French baby-daddy Francois-Henri Pinault wanted her to have an abortion, the supermodel’s lawyer claimed as their contentious child support trial kicked off today in Manhattan Family Court. The two spent the afternoon embroiled in a bitter child-support trial set to determine Pinault’s obligations for their 5-year-old son, Augustin, conceived during the couple’s fleeting, four-month affair from 2005.

The gorgeous Evangelista, 46, has presented Pinault with a list of Augie’s monthly expenses totaling more than $46,000 a month — in hopes Pinault will pay all or most of it. Pinault, meanwhile, has blasted Evangelista for seeking not just child support, but “mom support” as well, claiming through anonymous sources that the cover girl’s requests “don’t pass the smell test.”

Augie’s expenses include $15-16,000 a month for gun-toting, ex-NYPD detective chauffeurs, plus a 24-hour nanny costing almost $7,000 a month.

“After some initial happiness, he told her he wished she would terminate the pregnancy,” Evangelista’s lawyer William Beslow told a support magistrate, taking the gloves off in describing a conversation from Jan. 2006.

Evangelista, who was then in her early 40s, told Pinault she would keep the baby.

“She would support the child herself,” Evangelista told him, “since he had made it perfectly clear to her that he had no interest in doing so,” the lawyer said. “And she did. ”

On the stand, Pinault said he met Evangelista in May of 2005, began dating her in September, and learned of the pregnancy in early 2006.

“I asked her what was her intention with the pregnancy. I was not involved in the decision of having babies,” he said. “We were dating four months and I didn’t even know her very much.”

The Frenchman admitted he dumped Evangelista because he wanted nothing to do with the baby.

“She was so happy to be pregnant,” he remembered. “But it was not planned. I decided to stop the relationship at that point.”

Asked then by Beslow whether he believed Evangelista had intentionally become pregnant, he answered: “Well, she can answer that but I guess… I was not involved in the decision of having a baby,” he said. “Then of course, I told her I would recognize the baby which I did. I would take my responsibility and I did. ”

The four-month affair crashed and burned before — four months later — Pinault met his future wife, actress Salma Hayek. He was due to spend most of the afternoon on the witness stand, describing his finances under questioning by Beslow. In opening statements shortly after 2 p.m., Beslow insisted that Evangelista is not seeking to elevate either her or her son’s station in life. But for the first four years of Augie’s life, she has paid all of his expenses, “without one penny, franc or euro in financial contribution from the father,” Beslow said — despite Pinault’s in excess of $3 billion dollars in worth, plus annual income approaching $5 million.

Evangelista suffered a “tremendous diminution in her income in 2011,” Beslow said, due to the conclusion of her contract as the face of L’Oreal.

“Ms. Evangelista is not looking to piggyback on the lifestyle of Mr. Pinault,” Beslow insisted. “She is looking for a continuation of the reasonable lifestyle of Augie.”

Pinault’s lawyer, David Aronson, countered in his own opening statement that Pinault had repeatedly tried to broach the topic of support payments with Evangelista’s prior lawyers, only to be met with a “deafening” silence. Now, she is trying to shake Pinault down for what is, in effect, alimony, he complained.

“Most of the expenses [in Evangelista's list of $46,000-a-month in child care expenses] do not relate to Augie but they relate to Ms. Evangelista,” he said. “It is the classic case of someone trying to bootstrap herself to something that is alimony. Is Mr. Pinault a comfortable man of substantial means? Yes.” Aronson said. “But in the four years preceding 2011, her average income was $1.8 million,” he said.

“These people have more money than a lot of people,” Aronson conceded. “But our position is that what we understand is being asked for is just ridiculous.”

Evangelista hasn’t been able to provide a clear accounting of how much the chauffeurs work for Augie, and how much they work for her, Aronson has complained in prior hearings.

“The great majority of these expenses … are expenses that Ms. Evangelista claims on her tax returns are deductible business expenses,” he said today.

But Augie is just seeking a comparable lifestyle to what Pinault lavishes on Valentina, his 4-year-old daughter by Hayek, Beslow argues. Pinault spends $50,000 a month just on the taxes, upkeep and loan payments for the $12 million Los Angeles home he’s put in trust for the girl, Valentina.

[From The New York Post]

So… Linda supported her son herself until 2011, and that’s when she asked Pinault to contribute something to support his son, and his lawyers balked. So she sued for $46,000 a month. While I can’t even imagine how awesome it would be to be have $46,000 a month, when you think about it… that’s $552,000 a year, presumably until Augie turns 18, which will happen in about 12 years. So… if Linda gets what she wants, Pinault will be paying out about $6.6 million for his son. Once again, a huge amount of money. But Pinault is a billionaire and he’s spending much more than that on his daughter Valentina, with Salma Hayek. I don’t know… I think both Pinault and Evangelista seem kind of crazy here. *shrugs*

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

These are some new photos of Salma Hayek and her billionaire husband François-Henri Pinault out and about in LA over the weekend. According to Fame Pictures, they played tennis with some friends, then did some shopping at Whole Foods. While I don’t find Pinault to be unattractive, I just don’t think Salma and Pinault go together aesthetically, and it’s pretty obvious that “Oh yeah, I bet he’s rich. Really rich.” Also: Salma plays tennis?!?! With those boobs?? Dear God. THAT is how she landed a billionaire husband.

You know how else she landed a billionaire? By being very forgiving, and looking the other way when it suits her. Like, Salma has been photographed solo several times over the past month, but this is (I think) the first time Salma and Francois-Henri have made a public appearance together since the Linda Evangelista thing blew up all over the place. A few months ago, it was revealed that Linda’s four-year-old son Augie was actually fathered by Pinault. The revelation came about because Linda has taken the whole mess to the French courts, where she’s trying to get Pinault to pay child support for little Augie. Unfortunately, bitch is kind of crazy, and she’s asking for $46,000 a month from Pinault. I still think that’s a crazy amount, but most of you were like, “Well, that’s what Valentina is getting.” Still, be reasonable, please. Anyway, there’s a totally random and probably untrue report about how Salma is really pissed off about this Linda situation:

Two of the world’s most beautiful women are at each other’s throats in a Hollywood love triangle turned nasty. An Oscar-nominated movie star with an adorable young daughter and a billionaire husband, Salma Hayek thought she was living the dream. That is, until five weeks ago, when her marriage to fashion mogul Francois-Henri Pinault was turned upside down by the revelation he had fathered a love child with supermodel Linda Evangelista.

Friends say Salma, 44, was initially devastated by the news. But now that Linda, 46, has turned such a private matter into a public scandal by taking the Frenchman to court, demanding a staggering $46,000 a month in child support, the Mexican beauty is incandescent with rage.

A close friend says, “Salma is absolutely livid. The money Linda is asking for is absolutely crazy – it is clearly just Linda’s way of sticking the knife in because Francois-Henri chose Salma over her. Salma is so angry, she wants to scratch Linda’s eyes out!”

Linda claims she needs almost $600,000 a year to pay for 24-hour nannies, armed chauffeurs and other staff she and her four-year-old son Augustin cannot do without. If Linda, who’s worth more than $8 million, is successful, it will be one of the world’s most expensive child-support settlements – and Francois-Henri, who is worth an estimated $11.5 billion, is fighting the pay-out to the end.

[From The Morung Express]

So Salma went from shock that her husband fathered a child around the same time that he was romancing her (Salma), and she just blames Linda? Doubtful. Of course, I tend to think that Salma has known about Linda for a while, so I don’t think there was much “shock” to the paternity going public.

Photos courtesy of Fame.

Last month, tabloids revealed something that many of you had assumed for a while: that the father of Linda Evangelista’s 4-year-old son Augustin is Francois-Henri Pinault, best known in American circles as “Salma Hayek’s French billionaire husband”. Linda had never publicly revealed her son’s paternity, and it’s believed that Pinault fathered Augustin while he and Salma were “on a break”. At least, that’s the official version that Salma Hayek wants us to know. Anyway, as it turns out, Francois-Henri had barely given Linda any child support for little Augustin, and so Linda is in the process of taking Pinault to court, which is how this scandal went public. Now the New York Post reveals that Linda’s child support negotiations have taken an odd turn: Linda wants $46,000 a month in child support. Er…

It’s not cheap being a supermodel mommy! Glamorous cover girl Linda Evangelista came to Manhattan Family Court yesterday — and slapped her deadbeat billionaire French baby-daddy with a $46,000-a-month support request.

“That would probably be the largest support order in the history of the Family Court,” noted Support Magistrate Matthew Troy, who is expected to decide on an amount when the parties return to Family Court next month.

The demure but towering Evangelista, still stunning at 46, is demanding the cash from Francois-Henri Pinault — CEO of the Paris-based luxury conglomerate that owns Gucci, Yves St. Laurent and Bottega Veneta — who is the father of her 4 year old, Augustin James, to whom he has not paid a penny since the boy’s birth.

Pinault is married to Salma Hayek, with whom he has another child of nearly identical age — 3-year-old Valentina. While Pinault lavishes Valentina with luxuries — he even spends $50,000 a month for a $12 million Los Angeles estate held in trust in the girl’s name — Evangelista has been saddled with the entire cost of caring for and protecting little Augie, complained the model’s lawyer, William Beslow.

“He’s just been sitting back, paying zero,” Beslow told the magistrate yesterday.

The majority of the monthly sum Evangelista is requesting would cover the round-the-clock nannies and gun-toting drivers that are simply the due of any son of a single mom and an overseas billionaire, her lawyer argued yesterday. But Pinault, whose family is worth an estimated $11.5 billion, is fighting the expenditures tooth and nail.

During a lengthy deposition last Tuesday, Pinault’s lawyer grilled her on just why she needs a team of heat-packing drivers who are former police detectives — at a whopping cost of $175,000 a year.

Evangelista also wants $80,000 a year for a nanny, Pinault lawyer David Aaronson complained to the judge yesterday.

“She testified that she wants to have a 24-hour nanny because she does not want to be alone with the child . . . Miss Evangelista, you should understand, has a worth of more than $8 million, and she earned, last year, $1.8 million.”

The judge immediately scratched out the $7,500 Evangelista was seeking for monthly “vacation” expenses, but ultimately seemed very sympathetic to the security and nanny costs, noting that these may simply be prudent expenditures for raising a high-profile, high-risk Manhattan scion.

“These are the extraordinary expenses that may be a part of the child’s life,” the judge said. “And if there is a trial [in the support case] with a lot of publicity, there will probably be a need for two detectives to drive this kid around.”

It’s understandable, too, for Evangelista to want another adult — a nanny — to be on hand given her security concerns and travel requirements of her job, the judge said.

“How many hours a week do you work?” the judge asked the model at one point.

“On days when I do not work, I am working on my image,” Evangelista answered, her voice soft, and tinged with defensiveness. “I have to hit the gym. I have beauty appointments. I have to work toward my next job and maintaining my image,” she said, “just like an athlete.”

“When I work, it can be a 16-hour day,” she added. Both lawyers and Evangelista declined comment after the proceeding.

[From The New York Post]

My first thought was that Linda isn’t doing much these days, and hasn’t done much for the past decade, but that was before I knew that she was still working 16-hour days (doing God knows what) and “working on her image.” I too can understand wanting security and a nanny and such, but $46,000 a month does sound extreme, to put it mildly. To me, the funniest part is that she was asking for $7500 a month – in vacation expenses. A MONTH. Dear God, I’ve always sort of liked Linda, but she’s gotten pretty crazy, right? I guess it’s to be expected, though. You can’t get knocked up be a billionaire without this kind of junk going down. *plotting*

Photos courtesy of WENN.

This feels like one of those stories where we have to break out our ten-year calendars and our calculators to make sense of. According to the NY Post, Linda Evangelista has a four-year-old son. That alone surprised me – I remembered her being pregnant, vaguely, a few years ago, but was it really four-to-five years ago? And she had a boy? And she never revealed the paternity? So now that we’re all on the same page: Linda has a four-year-old son, and she’s never told anybody who his father is. Now the NY Post says that the dad is Francois Henri Pinault, best known as Salma Hayek’s baby-daddy/husband. SCANDAL?!? Eh. The way the baby daddy drama is described, it sounds like Pinault fathered Linda’s baby when he and Salma were split up (another event I have no memory of).

It’s a baby mystery no more. The father of supermodel Linda Evangelista’s 4-year-old boy is none other than billionaire Frenchman Francois-Henri Pinault — who just happens to be the husband of actress Salma Hayek, The Post has learned.

Despite Evangelista’s rep denying Pinault’s paternity when confronted with it by The Post’s Page Six back in October 2007, the Victoria’s Secret stunner came to court yesterday in hopes of hashing out a support agreement with Pinault, the father of the boy, Augustin James.

The Manhattan magistrate’s court action confirms that the two-timing Pinault — CEO of the $28 billion conglomerate that owns Gucci, Bottega Veneta and Yves St. Laurent — is the daddy to two 4-year-olds by different world-famous beauties.

One is Valentina, acknowledged and cared for by her parents, Pinault and Hayek, who jet between France, New York and LA. The other is Evangelista’s boy, unacknowledged by both the mogul and his actress wife, who has repeatedly insisted in interviews that Pinault has only three children — Valentina and two from his previous marriage to his first wife.

Evangelista, 46, herself has zealously guarded the love child’s paternity, even lying to protect Pinault. A year after “Augie’s” birth, she was claiming in interviews that the father was “a New York architect.”

He rep at DNA Model Management, Didier Fernandez, called the Pinault paternity rumor “untrue” when confronted with it by Page Six in 2007.

Yesterday was the model’s third or fourth trip to Family Court, and no agreement was reached, making a fall support trial looking likely, according to a court source.

Evangelista left glumly without commenting to a reporter. Pinault, 49, was a no-show, but that was due to a misunderstanding, said his lawyer, David Aronson.

“We had understood that it was to be a brief, telephone conference, to bring Magistrate Troy up to date on what the status was,” Aronson told The Post when asked about the court date yesterday.

Evangelista’s lawyer, William Beslow, had no comment Evangelista and Pinault conceived their boy in early 2006, when Pinault was reportedly separated from then-gal pal Hayek, whom he wed in 2009.

[From The New York Post]

So not only is Pinault the father but he’s also a deadbeat dad? For God’s sake, he’s a BILLIONAIRE. And if Linda’s son was truly conceived during a lull in Pinault and Hayek’s relationship, why not simply own up to it? Unless the boy was conceived while Salma and Francois were actually together (more likely) and Francois has been lying to Salma all of this time (most likely)? Ugh.

It also sounds like Linda has really tried to keep all of this private too. She’s so odd, but in retrospect, I’m happy that she was able to carry a baby to term. I remember that she had a very difficult miscarriage years ago, when she was with some other dude.

Photos courtesy of WENN.