As we heard earlier this week, Kelly Rutherford lost custody of her two children, Hermes, nine, and Helena, six, to her ex husband, Daniel Giersch. The children have lived with their father in Monaco since 2012. Kelly was awarded €3,000 a month maintenance and can no longer have the children visit her in the US. She will be allowed to visit with them in Monaco for about half of their school vacations. This seemed like an inevitable ruling by the Monaco court, which only recently gained jurisdiction over the case. Kelly previously kept the children with her in New York past their scheduled visitation time this summer, deliberately causing them to miss their plane. She also did not bring the children with her to court at first as required, although she eventually surrendered them when ordered by the NY judge.
We reported on the news as obtained by the Daily Mail. The ruling took place in Monaco on November 26, suggesting that there may have been a gag order in place or else Kelly would have played it up in the press by now, right? (So far we have no evidence of that and it’s just conjecture on my part.) I’m also assuming that The Daily Mail found the court ruling on their own, as their papers were dated 12-14.
TMZ obtained additional information in which the judge ruled that Kelly posed a “strong risk of abduction” to her children:
Rutherford lost custody of the children in August to battled ex-husband Daniel Giersch, who is a resident of the country. In a written ruling, obtained by TMZ, the judge said there was “a strong risk of the children’s abduction and retention in the United States” — translation, there was a big chance she’d flee with the kids
I don’t really understand how Kelly supposedly lost custody in August as TMZ claims when the ruling on The Daily Mail is dated November 26. Plus the last we heard she was ordered to surrender her passport and the children’s US passport while visiting and her case was heard in Monaco this September, not August. Then, in October, multiple outlets reported that no decision had yet been made in the case. So their reporting doesn’t add up but maybe Kelly lied to the press.
Regardless it’s true that Kelly posed an abduction risk. Not only did she commit parental abduction by keeping the children with her this August, she made multiple threats that she would abduct them. She even spoke to TMZ with her lawyer and encouraged other people to take the children on her behalf. She said:
I think it would be wonderful for somehow to show how much they appreciate US citizens. I think whoever brings my kids home is going to be pretty much a hero. I mean they’re going to be doing the right thing for children, for citizens of America. It’s a very pro-America thing to do. If something went wrong, we’re not saying it’s their fault, we’re saying we really need some help here.
Later, after she was ordered to surrender the children this summer, Kelly made the ridiculous statement that “When you’re an American citizen you’re not required to obey a foreign country, especially a foreign country where you have no citizenship.”
So the Monaco judge made a ruling based on Kelly’s behavior and her statements on-the-record. There’s no provision in the ruling posted on The Daily Mail for a monitor to be present during Kelly’s visits but it seems more than warranted in this case.
photo credit: WENN.com and FameFlynet